{
  "id": 3332212,
  "name": "Mary L. Prindle et al. v. The City of Evanston",
  "name_abbreviation": "Prindle v. City of Evanston",
  "decision_date": "1906-12-22",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "345",
  "last_page": "345",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "224 Ill. 345"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "223 Ill. 428",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        3336709
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/223/0428-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "223 Ill. 428",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        3336709
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/223/0428-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 108,
    "char_count": 1129,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.757,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.09355294459252257
    },
    "sha256": "e5deabda577dcef3a25873c34299e96b5ad8bb7d6787f1b3676d068912574a59",
    "simhash": "1:3ae162e3df2dbf5e",
    "word_count": 194
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:59:09.184737+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Mary L. Prindle et al. v. The City of Evanston."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam\n: This is a proceeding for the confirmation of a special assessment for the improvement of a portion of Maple avenue, in the city of Evanston. The ordinance under which the improvement was to be constructed provided for the use of Warren\u2019s bitulithic pavement, a patented pavement, covered by many letters patent from the United States, both as to the composition of the substance and the manner of spreading it on the street. The questions involved in this case are fully considered and decided in the case of Siegel v. City of Chicago, 223 Ill. 428, and for .the reasons therein given the judgment of the county court of Cook county is reversed.\nJudgment reversed.\nMr. Justice Carter took no part in the decision of this case.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "George S. Baker, for appellants.",
      "Edwin L. Harpham, Corporation Counsel, (George A. Mason, and Arthur Jones, of counsel,) for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Mary L. Prindle et al. v. The City of Evanston.\nOpinion filed December 22, 1906.\nThis case is controlled by the decision in Siegel v. City of Chicago, 223 Ill. 428.\nAppeal from the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. Orrin N. Carter, Judge, presiding.\nGeorge S. Baker, for appellants.\nEdwin L. Harpham, Corporation Counsel, (George A. Mason, and Arthur Jones, of counsel,) for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0345-01",
  "first_page_order": 345,
  "last_page_order": 345
}