{
  "id": 5303854,
  "name": "Augusta Middeke, Adm'r, etc., v. Rose Balder",
  "name_abbreviation": "Middeke v. Balder",
  "decision_date": "1901-11-26",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "525",
  "last_page": "526",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "98 Ill. App. 525"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "92 Ill. App. 227",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5286760
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/92/0227-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 120,
    "char_count": 1528,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.582,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.704314459030006e-08,
      "percentile": 0.45362123428817663
    },
    "sha256": "67047ffe86dcbc796893971b25cf850eedcbf9481fe5db0cc786df1e4919e57e",
    "simhash": "1:c0069349dafba2aa",
    "word_count": 250
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:14:32.769923+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Augusta Middeke, Adm\u2019r, etc., v. Rose Balder."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Opinion\nper Curiam.\nThe facts in this cause will be found stated in Balder v. Middeke, 92 Ill. App. 227. The decree then under consideration was reversed and the cause \u201cremanded for further proceedings consistent wTith this decision.\u201d Such further proceedings have been had and a decree entered accordingly, from which this appeal is prosecuted. Ho new evidence was introduced, and the record in all material respects is the same as when the cause was before reviewed in the Appellate Court.\nThe decision then made and the views then expressed, so far as this court is concerned, are binding and conclusive.\nThe judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Geo. F. Ort, attorney for appellant.",
      "Thos. H. Joyce, Dent & Whitman and W. O. Bindley, attorneys for appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Augusta Middeke, Adm\u2019r, etc., v. Rose Balder.\n1. Practice \u2014 Where a Decree is Reversed and Remanded. \u2014 Where a decree is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings consistent with the decision, and such further proceedings have been had and a decree entered accordingly, from which another appeal is prosecuted, no new evidence being introduced and the record in all material respects being the same as when the cause was previously reviewed, the decision then made, so far as this court is concerned, is binding and conclusive.\nBill of Interpleader. \u2014 Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Charles G. Neely, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1901.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed November 26, 1901.\nGeo. F. Ort, attorney for appellant.\nThos. H. Joyce, Dent & Whitman and W. O. Bindley, attorneys for appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0525-01",
  "first_page_order": 549,
  "last_page_order": 550
}
