{
  "id": 5349777,
  "name": "David Graham et al. v. The People ex rel.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Graham v. People",
  "decision_date": "1882-09-28",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "321",
  "last_page": "322",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "104 Ill. 321"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "95 Ill. 571",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2723268
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/95/0571-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "92 Ill. 426",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2740870
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/92/0426-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "91 Ill. 80",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2753000
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/91/0080-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 136,
    "char_count": 1733,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.509,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.3522948057117156e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7933593811839995
    },
    "sha256": "cc4034e6eff8309886436e27838a24036a1762b50a4c11cf012a5d63b0cb078a",
    "simhash": "1:85f18cde686d4d09",
    "word_count": 301
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:17:57.202414+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "David Graham et al. v. The People ex rel."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam :\nThis was an information in the nature of a quo warranto, filed in the circuit court of Warren county, to determine the question of title in the defendants to exercise the offices, one, of mayor, and the others, of aldermen, of the city of Monmouth. From a judgment of ouster against the defendants in the circuit court, they took this appeal directly to this court.\nThe appeal must be dismissed. It should have been taken. to the Appellate Court. The only claim that there can be of a right of appeal directly to this court, fiiust be upon the ground that a franchise is involved. In Board of Trade v. The People, 91 Ill. 80, we held that the right to membership in a private corporation was not a franchise, and in The People v. Holtz et al. 92 Ill. 426, that an office is not a franchise, within the meaning of the constitution and the statute prescribing the appellate jurisdiction of.the Supreme and Appellate Courts, the office of school directors being the one there involved. And see Chicago and Western Indiana R. R. Co. v. Dunbar, 95 Ill. 571.\nAppeal dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam :"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. Almon Kidder, Mr. Wm. G. Norcross, and Messrs. Pepper & Kirkpatrick, for the appellants.",
      "Mr. John W. Matthews, State\u2019s Attorney, for the appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "David Graham et al. v. The People ex rel.\nFiled at Springfield September 28,1882.\nAppeal\u2014an office is not a franchise. An office is not a franchise, within the meaning of the constitution and the statute prescribing the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme and Appellate Courts. Therefore, an appeal does not lie directly to this court from a judgment of the circuit court, ousting a party from an office.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Warren county; the Hon. John J. Glenn, Judge, presiding.\nMr. Almon Kidder, Mr. Wm. G. Norcross, and Messrs. Pepper & Kirkpatrick, for the appellants.\nMr. John W. Matthews, State\u2019s Attorney, for the appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0321-01",
  "first_page_order": 321,
  "last_page_order": 322
}