{
  "id": 2600115,
  "name": "John Bickerdike, Appellant, v. Daniel Dean, Appellee",
  "name_abbreviation": "Bickerdike v. Dean",
  "decision_date": "1859-01",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "199",
  "last_page": "200",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "21 Ill. 199"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 178,
    "char_count": 2333,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.567,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.4033266686372354e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3392091585262307
    },
    "sha256": "981d153ea706ec4754b4b59a0ea60d913b8f7185552b3b06a3be7d764fa3307e",
    "simhash": "1:fee6dd962e61e6dc",
    "word_count": 391
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:57:32.613552+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "John Bickerdike, Appellant, v. Daniel Dean, Appellee."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Caton, C. J.\nThe appellant was convicted before a justice of the peace, for continuing an obstruction in a public highway.\nWe decided in the case of Crosby v. Gipps, 19 Ill. R. 309, that a justice of the peace has no jurisdiction of the offense, and for that reason this judgment must be reversed.\nJudgment reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Caton, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Logan & Hay, for Appellant.",
      "C. L. Higbee, for Appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "John Bickerdike, Appellant, v. Daniel Dean, Appellee.\nAPPEAL FROM PIKE.\nA justice of the peace has not jurisdiction to levy a fine for continuing an obstruction to a highway.\nThis was an action originally instituted before a justice of the peace, to recover the penalties provided for in the tenth section of the road laws, for obstructing and continuing an obstruction in a public road after notice to remove the same.\nOn the trial of the cause in the Circuit Court, judgment was rendered for the informer, the plaintiff below, and the defendant belosv brings the case to this court.\nThe notice served upon the defendant to remove the obstruction was as follows:\n\u2018\u2018 To Mr. John Bickerdike, Sr., John Bickerdike, Jr., George Bickerdike, William Booland, Richard Bickerdike, and William Bickerdike:\n\u201c You, and each of you, are hereby notified to remove the obstructions which you have placed in the public road leading from Detroit to Griggsville, both in Pike county, Illinois. Said obstructions are on that part of the road passing over the north-west quarter of the south-west quarter of section thirty-six, in township four south of the base line, range three west of the fourth principal meridian. If such obstructions are not moved, suit will be commenced for the penalty fixed by law.\nHIRAM DEAN,\nOverseer of Roads of District No. 10, of said Township.\u201d\nDefendant objected to the giving of this notice in evidence, which objection was overruled. This was the only notice given in evidence.\n\u00ab Plaintiff adduced evidence tending to show that defendant had obstructed a road leading from Griggsville to Detroit, which ran over the land described in the notice, and that the obstruction was continued for several days after the service of the above notice, and furthermore gave evidence tending to show that the road so obstructed had been used as a public road for over twenty years.\nThere was a judgment for plaintiff, for ten dollars debt, besides costs.\nLogan & Hay, for Appellant.\nC. L. Higbee, for Appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0199-01",
  "first_page_order": 193,
  "last_page_order": 194
}