{
  "id": 5805985,
  "name": "Thomas S. Lee v. The People ex rel. Alice A. Davault",
  "name_abbreviation": "Lee v. People ex rel. Davault",
  "decision_date": "1892-03-28",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "536",
  "last_page": "538",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "140 Ill. 536"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "134 Ill. 240",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5437171
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/134/0240-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "82 Ill. 104",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5315018
      ],
      "weight": 3,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "193"
        },
        {
          "page": "212"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/82/0104-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "34 Ill. App. 448",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        4997000
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/34/0448-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "77 Ill. 271",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        821760
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/77/0271-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "79 Ill. 409",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2687103
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/79/0409-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "134 Ill. 246",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "82 Ill. 193",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5314313
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "212"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/82/0193-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "82 Ill. 104",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5315018
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/82/0104-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 255,
    "char_count": 4301,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.502,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.993096289601736e-07,
      "percentile": 0.9541471336745887
    },
    "sha256": "3802eeb0a4ab6f13f0b2b191c2dd021b1bc654695f37a24b2a9e87a0e4b85d2e",
    "simhash": "1:c6a5bea4e834e980",
    "word_count": 765
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:32:28.193649+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Thomas S. Lee v. The People ex rel. Alice A. Davault."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Scholfield\ndelivered the opinion of the Court;\nThe question here is, whether an appeal lies directly to the Appellate Court from a judgment of the county court in - a prosecution for bastardy, or must it be prosecuted to the circuit court of the county. In Lewis v. The People, 82 Ill. 104, we held that section 187 of chapter 37 of the Revised Statutes of 1874 allowed an appeal from the county court to the circuit court in all eases not otherwise provided for in the 188th section of the same chapter; that the latter section provided for appeals or writs of error only in judgments for the sale of lands for taxes and special assessments, and from orders on applications by executors, administrators, guardians and conservators for the sale of real estate, and so, not i\u00f1cluding prosecutions for bastardy, they are necessarily within the 187th section, and the appeal in such case must be to the circuit court, alone. That ruling was followed in Hauskins v. The People, 82 Ill. 193, and Stanley v. The People, 84 id. 212. The ruling seems to have been recognized by the court in Scharf v. The People, 134 Ill. 246, wherein it was said the defendant was permitted the verdict of two juries. But that remark was entirely obiter, as there was nothing in the case then before the court calling for it.\nSince the decision in the Lewis case, and other cases decided upon the ruling in that case, the General Assembly has created the Appellate Court, and by an amendment to section 8 of that act it is now provided that the Appellate Court \u201cshall have jurisdiction of all matters of appeal or writs of error from the final judgments, orders or decrees of any of the * * * county courts, * * * in any suit or proceeding at law or in chancery other than criminal cases not misdemeanors,\u201d etc. (Laws of 1887, p. 156.) This operates as an amendment of section 88 of the Practice act, and it should be read and construed as a part thereof. When it is so read, it is plain the \u25a0effect is to give the appeal in the bastardy case direct to the Appellate Court, for although a bastardy proceeding is not a suit at common law, it is clearly \u201ca proceeding at law.\u201d The manifest purpose is to make the appeal, in all cases enumerated, from the final order, judgment or decree of the county court to the Appellate Court.\nThe Appellate Court erred in dismissing the appeal, and for that error its judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.\nJudgment reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Scholfield"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. A. Ney Sessions, and Messrs. Karraker & Lingle, for the appellant:",
      "Mr. W. C. Moreland, for the appellee:"
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Thomas S. Lee v. The People ex rel. Alice A. Davault.\nFiled at Mt. Vernon\nMarch 28, 1892.\n1. Appeal\u2014in bastardy proceedings. Since the amendment of the-eighth section of the Appellate Court act, an appeal from the judgment of the county court in a bastardy proceeding lies directly to the Appellate Court.\n2. Same\u2014section 8 of Appellate Court act construed. The amendment to section 8 of the Appellate Court act, giving that court jurisdiction of all matters of appeal or writs of error from the final judgments, orders- or decrees of the county court, in any suit or proceeding at law or in chancery other than criminal cases not misdemeanors, etc., operates as-an amendment to section 88 of the Practice act, and should be read and construed as a part thereof.\nAppeal from the Appellate Court for the Fourth District;\u2014 \u25a0heard in that court on appeal from the County Court of Union-county; the Hon. M. C. Crawford, Judge, presiding.\nMr. A. Ney Sessions, and Messrs. Karraker & Lingle, for the appellant:\nThe cases cited by the Appellate Court are not in point. Holcomb v. People, 79 Ill. 409; Lewis v. People, 82 id. 104; Hauskins v. People, id. 193; Stanley v. People, 84 id. 212.\nA statute must be construed so that all its parts may stand, if possible. Fowler v. Perkins, 77 Ill. 271.\nMr. W. C. Moreland, for the appellee:\nRogers v. People, 34 Ill. App. 448, Lewis v. People, 82 Ill. 104, Hauskins v. People, id. 193, and Stanley v. People, 84 id. 212, all decide that appeals in bastardy cases lie directly from-the county court to the circuit court, and not to the Appellate Court.\nThis same question was presented directly to this court, and the holding then was, that the appeal should have been taken from the county court to the circuit court. In Scharf v. People, 134 Ill. 240, the same doctrine is laid down by the Supreme Court."
  },
  "file_name": "0536-01",
  "first_page_order": 536,
  "last_page_order": 538
}