{
  "id": 3339711,
  "name": "The City of Chicago et al. v. Daniel J. Gillen",
  "name_abbreviation": "City of Chicago v. Gillen",
  "decision_date": "1906-06-14",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "112",
  "last_page": "112",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "222 Ill. 112"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "221 Ill. 379",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        3344043
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/221/0379-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "221 Ill. 379",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        3344043
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/221/0379-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 107,
    "char_count": 1025,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.719,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.188176114372702e-08,
      "percentile": 0.5093580745441143
    },
    "sha256": "95a7f2f96406fc28674343dd26443afba18017b454c07a2eb9d163aca6906820",
    "simhash": "1:00b65e760231e3d0",
    "word_count": 174
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:26:01.730945+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "The City of Chicago et al. v. Daniel J. Gillen."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam :\nThe two controlling questions in this case, namely, the jurisdiction of the court and the waiver of notice by appellee, are conclusively settled by the case of Powell v. Bullis, 221 Ill. 379. The record filed as a return to the writ fails to show that appellee was notified of the charges against him or in any way waived such notice. The trial board and civil service commission, in the absence of such notice, were without authority to hear or determine the charges, and the judgment must be affirmed notwithstanding the other questions urged by appellants.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam :"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Cecil Page, (James Hamilton Lewis, Corporation Counsel, of counsel,) for appellants.",
      "A. D. Gash, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The City of Chicago et al. v. Daniel J. Gillen.\nOpinion filed June 14, 1906.\nThis case is controlled by the decision in Powell v. Bullis, 221 Ill. 379.\nAppeal from the Appellate Court for the First District;\u2014 heard in that court on appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Joseph E. Gary, Judge, presiding.\nCecil Page, (James Hamilton Lewis, Corporation Counsel, of counsel,) for appellants.\nA. D. Gash, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0112-01",
  "first_page_order": 112,
  "last_page_order": 112
}