{
  "id": 2832039,
  "name": "Samuel B. Brierly v. State of Illinois",
  "name_abbreviation": "Brierly v. State",
  "decision_date": "1906-12-29",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "28",
  "last_page": "28",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "2 Ill. Ct. Cl. 28"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
    "id": 8793,
    "name": "Illinois Court of Claims"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "202 Ill., 389",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        847181
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/202/0389-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 144,
    "char_count": 1599,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.491,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.08489896515202237
    },
    "sha256": "2ae4d52832c32e52bc1bbb8c238f802d9eab829e66e575543ba5229ed8daca53",
    "simhash": "1:28c7bc85e23568d9",
    "word_count": 274
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:17:25.480052+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Samuel B. Brierly v. State of Illinois."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Samuel B. Brierly is claimant herein against the State of Illinois for the sum of four hundred ($400.00) dollars, being the aggregate -sum of two license fees of two hundred ($200.00) dollars each, paid by claimant on or about August 24, 1899, and on April 8,1902, respectively, to Hon. J ames A. Bose, Secretary of State, for licenses issued to claimant to operate a \u201cprivate employment agency\u201d in the city of Chicago, under the Act of the General Assembly pertaining thereto, passed April 11,1899, and going into effect July 1,1899 (Session Laws 1899, pp. 268-271). Said Act being held unconstitutional by the Supreme Court April 24,1903, in the ease of Mathews v. The People, 202 Ill., 389.\nThe facts in this case are substantially like those in the ease of J. B. Hayden & Co. v. The State, this day decided by us. (See opinion therein.) And in view of what we have therein held and announced, we deem it unnecessary to further set forth or discuss either the facts of the case, or the law applicable thereto. Suffice to say that, as in that case, we think in this, that claimant paid such illegal fees to the State, under what amounts in law to compulsion and duress, and under protest. \"We, therefore accordingly award claimant, Samuel B. Brierly, the sum of four hundred ($400.00) dollars.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": null
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Louis T. Orr, for Claimant.",
      "W. H. Stead, Attorney- General, for State."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Samuel B. Brierly v. State of Illinois.\nOpinion filed December 29, 1906.\nLicense Pee \u2014 paid under protest \u2014 may be recovered \u2014 when. Illegal fees paid into the State treasury under protest, by compulsion or duress may be recovered.\nLouis T. Orr, for Claimant.\nW. H. Stead, Attorney- General, for State."
  },
  "file_name": "0028-01",
  "first_page_order": 60,
  "last_page_order": 60
}