{
  "id": 5540002,
  "name": "William H. Beadle v. Walter Cole et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Beadle v. Cole",
  "decision_date": "1898-04-21",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "136",
  "last_page": "136",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "173 Ill. 136"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "148 Ill. 253",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        3059718
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/148/0253-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "151 Ill. 197",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5470020
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/151/0197-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "148 Ill. 253",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        3059718
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/148/0253-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 152,
    "char_count": 1612,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.593,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.16120804726453164
    },
    "sha256": "5e8e77ff9dd4425a3d32992f989a77804ed1a974378f5295873d24ff78f22104",
    "simhash": "1:7c0d864a4422091a",
    "word_count": 274
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:15:43.178236+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "William H. Beadle v. Walter Cole et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam :\nThis is an appeal by plaintiff.below from a judgment for defendants below in an action of ejectment. The suit involves the same title which was adjudicated upon and settled by this court in Whitehead v. Hall, 148 Ill. 253. That suit was brought for one part of a tract of 255 acres, and this suit is for another. The appellant here occupies no better position than the appellant occupied in that case. He assails the same title, founded on the same redemption sale, which in the case cited was held good. We have carefully examined and considered the elaborate arguments made by appellant for a reconsideration of the questions involved, but are unable to see that any error was committed in the decision mentioned. The fact urged upon our attention that the redemption creditor was a defendant to the first foreclosure suit did not deprive him of the right to redeem under his own decree rendered in the second foreclosure suit. (Boynton v. Pierce, 151 Ill. 197.) We see no reason for overruling the former case, but are satisfied it was correctly decided.\nThe judgment of the circuit court will be affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam :"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "S. S. Whitehead, for appellant.",
      "Golden, Scholfield & Booth, and Robert E. Hamill, for appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "William H. Beadle v. Walter Cole et al.\nOpinion filed April 21, 1898\n\u2014Rehearing denied June 15, 1898.\nThis suit involves the same title adjudicated upon and held good in Whitehead v. Hall, 148 Ill. 253, and, the same questions being involved, the decision in that case controls this.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Clark county; the Hon. H. Van Sellar, Judge, presiding.\nS. S. Whitehead, for appellant.\nGolden, Scholfield & Booth, and Robert E. Hamill, for appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0136-01",
  "first_page_order": 136,
  "last_page_order": 136
}