{
  "id": 2822065,
  "name": "John Garrick et al. v. Angie P. Chamberlain",
  "name_abbreviation": "Garrick v. Chamberlain",
  "decision_date": "1881-03",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "476",
  "last_page": "476",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "100 Ill. 476"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 90,
    "char_count": 1039,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.474,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.477152700993678e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8071455131167878
    },
    "sha256": "36a46b4663aa97ce05ecd38b98ad3139eb7e15dc926a5be310aa065018df9ecd",
    "simhash": "1:240e78d82671cb11",
    "word_count": 189
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:32:43.701129+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "John Garrick et al. v. Angie P. Chamberlain."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Scott, J.:\nThere is nothing in the rules, or in any practice that has ever prevailed in this court, that would authorize a second petition by the same paity for a rehearing. A majority of the court are therefore of opinion that the motion made to strike what purports to be a second petition for a rehearing from the files, should be allowed, and it is accordingly done.\nPetition stricken from the files.\nDickey, Ch. J.: I do not concur in the opinion of the majority of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Scott, J.:"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "John Garrick et al. v. Angie P. Chamberlain.\nAt Ottawa, March Term, 1881.\nRehearing\u2014second petition by the same parly. A second petition for a rehearing of a cause'in this court by the same party is not allowable.\nAppeal from the Appellate Court for the First District.\nUpon the rendering of a decision in this case at a former term of this court, the appellee filed a petition for a rehearing, which was fully considered, and denied. Now a second petition for a rehearing is filed by the same party. The appellants move that it be stricken from the files."
  },
  "file_name": "0476-01",
  "first_page_order": 476,
  "last_page_order": 476
}