{
  "id": 6096336,
  "name": "William F. Bradshaw v. Peter McKinney",
  "name_abbreviation": "Bradshaw v. McKinney",
  "decision_date": "1842-12",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "56",
  "last_page": "57",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "4 Scam. 54"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "5 Ill. 54"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "1 Scam. 387",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Scam.",
      "case_ids": [
        2481741
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/2/0387-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "1 Scam. 390",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Scam.",
      "case_ids": [
        2480863
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/2/0390-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "2 Scam. 222",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Scam.",
      "case_ids": [
        2478161
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/3/0222-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "1 Scam. 534",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Scam.",
      "case_ids": [
        2480320
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/2/0534-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 126,
    "char_count": 1574,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.478,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.3217718642105666e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6268655045139697
    },
    "sha256": "6d98d4f1aa8eb486a462229c413d4f05b5f656d3772a4b412974480a760967cd",
    "simhash": "1:8b1990f9d73ec7b2",
    "word_count": 266
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:32:49.187861+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "William F. Bradshaw v. Peter McKinney."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Treat, Justice,\ndelivered the opinion of the court: Assumpsit on a note and guaranty. The declaration contains two counts. The defendant filed four pleas to the first count, and a demurrer to the second count. There was a demurrer to the third and fourth pleas, which was sustained. The record shows that the court, without deciding the demurrer to the second count, or noticing the first and second pleas, directed the clerk to assess the plaintiff\u2019s damages, and rendered judgment on the assessment. The decision is now assigned for error.\nIt was clearly erroneous to render judgment without [* 55] first deciding the demurrer. McKinney v. May, 1 Scam. 534; Nye v. Wright, 2 Scam. 222. It was also erroneous to render judgment without first trying the issues tendered by the defendant, on his first and second pleas. Manlove v. Bruner, 1 Scam. 390; Lyon v. Barney, 1 Scam. 387.\nFor these errors the judgment of the circuit court is reversed with costs, and the cause remanded for further proceeding.\nJudgment reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Treat, Justice,"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "O. Peters, for the plaintiff in error.",
      "L. B. Knowlton, for the defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "William F. Bradshaw v. Peter McKinney.\nError to Lee.\nI. Practice \u2014 demurrer pending. It is error to render judgment by default, and direct the clerk to assess the plaintiff\u2019s damages, while a demurrer to one count of the declaration, or one of the several pleas remains undisposed of.\n, This cause was heard in the court below, at the September term, 1841, before the Hon. Thomas C. Browne. Judgment was rendered for the plaintiff for \u00a7139.80 damages and costs of suit.\nO. Peters, for the plaintiff in error.\nL. B. Knowlton, for the defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0056-01",
  "first_page_order": 68,
  "last_page_order": 69
}