{
  "id": 3262465,
  "name": "The People ex rel. George N. Gridley v. Albert L. Hendee, County Clerk",
  "name_abbreviation": "People ex rel. Gridley v. Hendee",
  "decision_date": "1902-10-25",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "55",
  "last_page": "56",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "199 Ill. 55"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "196 Ill. 292",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        841254
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/196/0292-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 171,
    "char_count": 2915,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.614,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.1818393265000115e-07,
      "percentile": 0.9125873747851708
    },
    "sha256": "fccdcca17f22404430d9d9ef79dd177683cdb2bbda1b5b0d06f7216f48ec85fb",
    "simhash": "1:679cc2349c772ff1",
    "word_count": 493
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:58:13.793167+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "The People ex rel. George N. Gridley v. Albert L. Hendee, County Clerk."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Carter\ndelivered the opinion of the court:\nThe circuit court of Lake county sustained a demurrer to the petition of the relator, George N. Gridley, supervisor of assessments of Lake county, for a writ of man- damns to compel appellee, Albert L. Hendee, county clerk of said county, to provide duplicate assessors\u2019 books for the several townships and assessment districts of said county for the assessment of personal .property. The relator stood by his petition, and final judgment was rendered. This appeal was then taken.\nCounsel for appellant says: \u201cThe real point in this cause is whether, under the act of 1898 \u2018for the assessment of property and providing the means therefor, \u2019 it is the duty of the county clerk to prepare and furnish to the supervisor of assessments duplicate assessment books for personal property as well as real property, and that the assessment of personal property shall be made in the same books with the real. We insist that the statute requires the furnishing of the duplicate books for both personal and real property; the appellee contends otherwise.\u201d He also says that the appeal was taken in this case because the case relates to the revenue and because the State is interested, \u201cas a party or otherwise.\u201d But we have held that in order to give this court jurisdiction in a direct appeal from the trial court on the ground that the case relates to the revenue, it \u201cmust relate to the revenue directly, and not merely incidentally or remotely.\u201d (Wells v. Rogers, 196 Ill. 292.) It cannot'be held that this case relates to the revenue directly. It only involves a construction of the statute to determine whether or not the county clerk is required to make and deliver to the supervisor of assessments duplicate assessment books for the assessment of personal property. No more can it be said that the State is interested in the case, as a party or otherwise.\nHaving no jurisdiction to entertain this appeal, it must be dismissed.\nAppeal dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Carter"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "B. W. Coon, for appellant.",
      "Whitney, Upton & Whitney, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The People ex rel. George N. Gridley v. Albert L. Hendee, County Clerk.\nOpinion filed October 25, 1902.\n1. Appeals and errors\u2014revenue must be directly involved in appeal to Supreme Court. To give the Supreme Court jurisdiction of a direct appeal upon the ground that the case relates to the revenue, the case must relate directly to the revenue, and not merely incidentally or remotely.\n2. Same\u2014when case does not relate to the revenue. A case involving the construction of the statute to determine whether the county clerk is required to make and deliver to the supervisor of assessments duplicate assessment hooks for personal property does not relate to the revenue so as to justify a direct appeal to Supreme Court; nor is the State an interested party.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Lake county; the Hon. Charles H. Donnelly, Judge, presiding.\nB. W. Coon, for appellant.\nWhitney, Upton & Whitney, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0055-01",
  "first_page_order": 55,
  "last_page_order": 56
}