{
  "id": 2798394,
  "name": "Frank A. Schoenholz, Claimant, vs. State of Illinois, Respondent",
  "name_abbreviation": "Schoenholz v. State",
  "decision_date": "1929-01-15",
  "docket_number": "No. 1199",
  "first_page": "123",
  "last_page": "123",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "6 Ill. Ct. Cl. 123"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. Ct. Cl.",
    "id": 8793,
    "name": "Illinois Court of Claims"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 92,
    "char_count": 876,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.533,
    "sha256": "e4985aff373074e88846d405f0c49230734d67c720d5453f247a6451e718ad1d",
    "simhash": "1:6c1ae82f83c186d3",
    "word_count": 145
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:56:41.892765+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Frank A. Schoenholz, Claimant, vs. State of Illinois, Respondent."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Chief Justice Clarity\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nThis is a claim to recover damages by reason of construction of State Highway Number 2, .between Dixon, Illinois, and the village of Grand Detour, Illinois.\nPrevious to the construction of this road, there was a slope of the entire distance, down to the old road, but in the reconstruction of the new highway at the increased level, a depression four feet in depth was caused, which prevented the use of the land by claimant.\nIt appears from all of the evidence that the claimant was damaged and it is therefore recommended that the claimant be allowed the sum of $500.00.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Chief Justice Clarity"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Henry 0. Warner, for claimant.",
      "Oscar E. Carlstrom, Attorney General; Frank R. Eagle-ton, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "(No. 1199\nFrank A. Schoenholz, Claimant, vs. State of Illinois, Respondent.\nOpinion filed January 15, 1929.\nHenry 0. Warner, for claimant.\nOscar E. Carlstrom, Attorney General; Frank R. Eagle-ton, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent."
  },
  "file_name": "0123-01",
  "first_page_order": 149,
  "last_page_order": 149
}