{
  "id": 5237800,
  "name": "Robert Riley v. Hugh Quigley",
  "name_abbreviation": "Riley v. Quigley",
  "decision_date": "1871-01",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "352",
  "last_page": "353",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "58 Ill. 352"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "50 Ill. 304",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2606473
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/50/0304-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "50 Ill. 304",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2606473
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/50/0304-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 175,
    "char_count": 2003,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.563,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.15672516042441084
    },
    "sha256": "bda63622a9d1c6fe24c1c8900b2a811328d38bde786b8e2163dfa0b42d86c63b",
    "simhash": "1:10b35726a899e266",
    "word_count": 343
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:15:34.935712+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Robert Riley v. Hugh Quigley."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Chief Justice Lawrence\ndelivered the opinion of the Court:\nThis case has already been before this court, and is reported in 50 Ill. 304, where the facts will be found stated. It has since been heard in the court below, and a decree proforma entered for complainant.\nThe only difference between the present record and that formerly before us, is, that since the former hearing, the complainant has taken the depositions of Michael Quigley and Mary Furlong. Quigley is sworn for the purpose of showing he gave Riley notice of Hugh Quigley\u2019s mortgage at the time Riley bought. He admits, however, in his deposition, that he falsely told Riley\u2019s attorneys there was no mortgage, and this admission, and the fact that his testimony is inconsistent with the other evidence in the case, coming from unimpeached sources, compel us to discredit his statement.\nMary Furlong testifies as to what took' place when Riley went to the land to inquire of Hugh Quigley if he had a mortgage. Her testimony, however, is controverted by that of Rayburn, a wholly disinterested witness, who went with Riley, with full knowledge of the nature of the business, and his recollection of what Avas said is entitled to much more confidence than that of Mary Furlong, who was only accidentally present for a part of the time, if indeed she was present at all. Discredit is also cast upon some of her statements by the testimony of other witnesses besides Rayburn We adhere to our former views in regard to the case.\nThe decree is reversed and the cause remanded.\nDecree reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Chief Justice Lawrence"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. J. C. & C. L. Conkling, for the appellant.",
      "Mr. Charles S. Zane, and Messrs. Herndon & Orendorff, for the appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Robert Riley v. Hugh Quigley.\nThis is the same case reported in 50 Ill. 304, and the only question considered in the opinion of the court is the credibility of the additional testimony adduced on another hearing in the court below.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Sangamon county; the Hon. B. S. Edwards, Judge, presiding.\nMessrs. J. C. & C. L. Conkling, for the appellant.\nMr. Charles S. Zane, and Messrs. Herndon & Orendorff, for the appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0352-01",
  "first_page_order": 354,
  "last_page_order": 355
}