{
  "id": 8501273,
  "name": "Charles McDonnell v. The City of Chicago",
  "name_abbreviation": "McDonnell v. City of Chicago",
  "decision_date": "1871-09",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "350",
  "last_page": "351",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "60 Ill. 350"
    }
  ],
  "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": 144,
    "char_count": 1972,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.491,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.392552054677732e-08,
      "percentile": 0.27572283171721595
    },
    "sha256": "52ec015983ca780e1c49896d616a89fb615fd428800cb945a791e1ff7ae209c3",
    "simhash": "1:024a645bbe3a8938",
    "word_count": 344
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:24:14.980306+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Charles McDonnell v. The City of Chicago."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "\u00abPer Curiam :\nThe first section of the ordinance on which the assessment was based in this case, is as follows:\n\u201cThat curb walls be and are hereby ordered constructed on Market street, from the north curb line of Randolph street to the south curb line of Lake street, and rebuilt and repaired in said portion of Market street, where the same are not now in a good and sound condition, and that said Market street, from the north line of Randolph street to the south line of Lake street, be and is hereby ordered filled and paved with wooden blocks. Said work to be done under the superintendency of the Board of Public AYorks, conformably to the drawings prepared by said Board, and hereto annexed.\u201d\nAn ordinance similar to this was held, in Foss v. City of Chicago, 56 Ill. 354, to be void. So this must fall, for the same reasons given in that case. It is not distinguishable.\nThe judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.\nJudgment reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "\u00abPer Curiam :"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Spafford, McDaid & AYilso.N, for the appellant.",
      "Mr. M. F. Tuley, Corporation Counsel, for the appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Charles McDonnell v. The City of Chicago.\nSpecial assessments \u2014 in the city of Ohicago \u2014 of giving the Board of Public Works a discretion. An ordinance ordered to be constructed, on a certain street, curb walls, and to be rebuilt and repaired \u201c where the same are not now in a good aud sound condition,\u201d \u201csaid work to be done under the superintendency of the Board of Public Works, conformably to the drawings prepared byr said IJoardJHeld, the ordinance was void, because it undertook to vest in the Board of Public Works a discretion which should have been exercised by the common council alone.\nAppeal, from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Joseph E. Gary, Judge, presiding.\nThis was an application in the court below for a judgment upon a special assessment warrant, under an ordinance in the city of Chicago. A trial resulted in a judgment in favor of the city, from which the defendant appealed.\nMessrs. Spafford, McDaid & AYilso.N, for the appellant.\nMr. M. F. Tuley, Corporation Counsel, for the appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0350-01",
  "first_page_order": 352,
  "last_page_order": 353
}