{
  "id": 2605752,
  "name": "George W. Davis v. The People of the State of Illinois",
  "name_abbreviation": "Davis v. People",
  "decision_date": "1869-01",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "199",
  "last_page": "200",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "50 Ill. 199"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "37 Ill. 459",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5291781
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/37/0459-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 132,
    "char_count": 2008,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.562,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 3.2811149114969396e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8707592604819818
    },
    "sha256": "076be49f3e15d60d70417be05bd3c6b69831e7140c46188f61c9fed7cd110cfc",
    "simhash": "1:c881b849c0caacdd",
    "word_count": 355
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:50:26.600758+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "George W. Davis v. The People of the State of Illinois."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Chief Justice Breese\ndelivered the opinion of the Court:\nThis was a proseqution in the Circuit Court of Mason county, against George W. Davis, on a charge of bastardy.\nThe complaint was made in due form by the mother of the child, and the jury rendered a verdict of guilty, on which the court assessed the yearly support of the child, as under the statute, and rendered judgment therefor.\nThe only point made, is, as to the sufficiency of the verdict on which to found the judgment.\nIt has often been held by this court, that the proceeding in question, though nominally The People are plaintiffs, is, to all other intents and purposes, a civil proceeding. Starr v. The People, ante p. 52, and the cases there cited.\nThe verdict of guilty is responsive to the charge made, and is substantially good. It would have been more formal by adding, \u201cof being father of the child,\u201d but that is comprehended in the finding, as that was the charge. Armstrong v. The People, 37 Ill. 459. But the defendant took no exception to the form of the verdict, and as it is mere form, it cannot now be assigned for error.\nThe judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Chief Justice Breese"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Lacey & Wallace, for the plaintiff in error.",
      "Messrs. Roberts & Fullerton, for the people."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "George W. Davis v. The People of the State of Illinois.\n1. Bastardy\u2014of the nature of the proceeding. Although The People are nominally the plaintiffs in such a proceeding, yet it is, to all intents and purposes, a civil proceeding.\n2. Verdict\u2014of the form, of\u2014in a proceeding for bastardy. A verdict of \u201c guilty,\u201d is responsive to the charge in such a proceeding, and is substantially good. A more formal verdict would be, \u201c guilty of being the father of the child.\u201d But the former comprehends the latter.\nWhit of Error to the Circuit Court of Mason county ; the Hon. Charles Turner, Judge, presiding.\nThis was a prosecution for bastardy under the statute, and the only question presented by the record, is, as to the form of the verdict.\nMessrs. Lacey & Wallace, for the plaintiff in error.\nMessrs. Roberts & Fullerton, for the people."
  },
  "file_name": "0199-01",
  "first_page_order": 199,
  "last_page_order": 200
}