{
  "id": 8500540,
  "name": "S. M. Moore et al. v. The City of Chicago",
  "name_abbreviation": "Moore v. City of Chicago",
  "decision_date": "1871-09",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "243",
  "last_page": "244",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "60 Ill. 243"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "56 Ill. 354",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        817772
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/56/0354-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 149,
    "char_count": 2079,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.461,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.29474113763866e-08,
      "percentile": 0.38754344365250637
    },
    "sha256": "9e37255b911be21027f7ef10090a6d9b88f6315d9db7744f935bd197a327096e",
    "simhash": "1:0d726cdf2e2d0ad8",
    "word_count": 358
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:24:14.980306+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "S. M. Moore et al. v. The City of Chicago."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice McAllister\ndelivered the opinion of the Court:\nThe ordinance in this case, upon which the assessment proceedings are based, orders that Quincy street, from the west line of Clark street to tbe east line of LaSalle street, and from the west line of LaSalle street to tbe east line of Wells street, and from the west line of \"Wells street to tbe east line of Market street, be curbed with curb walls where curb walls are not already built, and that tbe curb walls in tbe portions of Quincy street thereinbefore described, be re-built and repaired where the same are not now in a good and sound condition, etc., said work to be done under the superintendence of the board of\u2019 public works.\nWe have repeatedly held that the common council is the only body which can exercise the discretion by this ordinance vested in the board of public works; that vesting such discretion in the board, prepares the way to unfair assessments, and tends to favoritism and fraud in letting contracts for the work. Foss v. City of Chicago, 56 Ill. 354. Such an ordinance is illegal and void.\nFor that reason, and that the collector was unauthorized to apply for the judgment, the same .is reversed and the cause remanded.\nJudgment reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice McAllister"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. Geo. C. Campbell, for the appellants.",
      "Mr. M. F. Tuley, Corporation Counsel, for the appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "S. M. Moore et al. v. The City of Chicago.\nSpecial assessment \u2014 void ordinance and assessment. Where an ordinance, directing the improvement of a street upon.whic.h an assessment is made for the purpose, directing it to be curbed with curb walls, where they are not already built., and curb walls be re-built where they are not in a good and sound condition, the work to be done under the superintendence of the board of public W'orks: Held, the ordinance and assessment under it are void, as the ordinance attempts to confer discretionary power which can only be exercised by the common council, and tended to induce unfair assessments, favoritism and fraud.\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Joseph E. Gary, Judge, presiding.\nMr. Geo. C. Campbell, for the appellants.\nMr. M. F. Tuley, Corporation Counsel, for the appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0243-01",
  "first_page_order": 245,
  "last_page_order": 246
}