{
  "id": 4740215,
  "name": "The People ex rel. William Klauser, County Collector, Appellee, vs. The Toledo, St. Louis and Western Railroad Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "People ex rel. Klauser v. Toledo, St. Louis & Western Railroad",
  "decision_date": "1913-12-17",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "161",
  "last_page": "162",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "261 Ill. 161"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 138,
    "char_count": 1700,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.696,
    "sha256": "bf8520d736aa2af8631c0e68d04566df69982d25611e14bbf74da6996de9bdb1",
    "simhash": "1:f94ce601d223ef52",
    "word_count": 279
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:07:32.535012+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "The People ex rel. William Klauser, County Collector, Appellee, vs. The Toledo, St. Louis and Western Railroad Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam)\nThe appellant, the Toledo, St. Louis and Western Railroad Company, objected to the application of the county collector of Shelby county, made at the June, 1913, term of the county court, for judgment against its property for delinquent taxes for the year 1912. The questions raised are precisely the same as those raised in People v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago and St. Louis Railway Co. (ante, p. 70,) with the exception that in this case two items in the taxes levied for county purposes are objected to which were not questioned in that case. These items are, \u201cFor pauper practice, $5000,\u201d and \u201cFor charitable institutions, $1000.\u201d At the meeting of the board of supervisors on June 9, 1913, the following items were substituted for those just set out: \u201cFor payment of medical and surgical services rendered to paupers, $5000,\u201d and \u201cFor support of paupers in State institutions, $1000.\u201d\nFor the reasons given in the case cited above, the judgment of the county court is reversed and the cause is remanded, with directions to sustain the objections and deny the application for judgment.\nReversed and remanded with directions.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam)"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "C. E. Pope, and W. C. Headen, (Charles A. SchmetTau, of counsel,) for appellant.",
      "W. E. Lowe, State\u2019s Attorney, (J. C. Willard, and William H. Craig, of counsel,) for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The People ex rel. William Klauser, County Collector, Appellee, vs. The Toledo, St. Louis and Western Railroad Company, Appellant.\nOpinion filed December 17, 1913.\nThis case is controlled by the decision in People v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago and St. Louis Railway Co. (ante, p. 70.)\nAppeal from the County Court of Shelby county; the Hon. J. K. P. Grider, Judge, presiding.\nC. E. Pope, and W. C. Headen, (Charles A. SchmetTau, of counsel,) for appellant.\nW. E. Lowe, State\u2019s Attorney, (J. C. Willard, and William H. Craig, of counsel,) for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0161-01",
  "first_page_order": 161,
  "last_page_order": 162
}