{
  "id": 2590763,
  "name": "James R. McCormick, Plaintiff in Error, v. William Gray, Defendant in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "McCormick v. Gray",
  "decision_date": "1854-12",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "138",
  "last_page": "139",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "16 Ill. 138"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 99,
    "char_count": 1095,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.488,
    "sha256": "7c7dc23de1b1d08616392cdd687f6b2b8066c25b67cf258ada6154a661198efa",
    "simhash": "1:ae08231d7f583351",
    "word_count": 190
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:25:07.210014+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "James R. McCormick, Plaintiff in Error, v. William Gray, Defendant in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Treat, C. J.\nGray brought an action against McCormick, and obtained a verdict therein. The court overruled a motion for a new trial, and rendered judgment on the verdict. The refusal to grant a new trial, is now assigned for error. The bill of exceptions does not profess to contain all of the evidence adduced on the trial. We therefore cannot inquire into the propriety of the decision. It should appear* on the face of the bill of exceptions, that the whole of the testimony is incorporated. In the absence of such a statement, the presumption is, that the evidence authorized the verdict. See Clark v. Willis, ante, 61.\nThe judgment must bo affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Treat, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "J. McConnbl, for Plaintiff in Error.",
      "D. A. Smith, for Defendant in Error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "James R. McCormick, Plaintiff in Error, v. William Gray, Defendant in Error.\nERROR TO MORGAN.\nWhen the refusal to grant a new trial is assigned, as a reason for the reversal of a judgment, the bill of exceptions should state the whole of the testimony.\nThis cause was heard before Woodson, Judge, at March term, 1854, of the Morgan Circuit Court.\nJ. McConnbl, for Plaintiff in Error.\nD. A. Smith, for Defendant in Error."
  },
  "file_name": "0138-01",
  "first_page_order": 134,
  "last_page_order": 135
}