{
  "id": 2609989,
  "name": "Michael Wallace v. The People of the State of Illinois",
  "name_abbreviation": "Wallace v. People",
  "decision_date": "1872-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "451",
  "last_page": "452",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "63 Ill. 451"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 149,
    "char_count": 2438,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.552,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.20341706357885e-07,
      "percentile": 0.9675954080720536
    },
    "sha256": "eeac89b53c2562bd7205550aa807b7b13635f2dc39c284694ed0d0f1a0e21dc4",
    "simhash": "1:257400ab04cf0d83",
    "word_count": 421
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:30:19.405961+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Michael Wallace v. The People of the State of Illinois."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam:\nAt the May term, 1871, of the Perry county circuit court, the plaintiff in error was indicted for the crime of larceny. The indictment contains but a single count, in which it is charged that the property alleged to have been stolen was the property of the \u201cAmerican Merchants\u2019 Union Express Company.\u201d\nA motion was entered to quash the indictment, which motion the circuit court overruled. A trial was subsequently had, and the plaintiff in error was found guilty, and thereupon he entered a motion in arrest of judgment, which was also overruled.\nThe rulings of the court on these motions are now assigned for error.\nWe are of opinion that the ownership of the property is defectively stated.\nIt is not averred that the American Merchants\u2019 Union Express Company is a corporation.\nThe rule seems to be well settled that property, vested in a body of persons, ought not to be laid as the property of that body unless such body is incorporated, but should be described as belonging to the individuals composing the company. Wharton\u2019s American Crim. Law, sec. 1828, p. 659 ; 2 Russell on Crimes, p. 100.\nIn this indictment, the property is not described as belonging to any natural person or persons, nor to any corporate body, and this defective statement was the ground of the motion in arrest.\nThe error was fatal, and the judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded.\nJudgment reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam:"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. Edward \"V. Pierce, for the plaintiff in error. ."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Michael Wallace v. The People of the State of Illinois.\n1. Pleading\u2014of the averment, as to the ownership of the property alleged to have been stolen, in an indictment for larceny. The rule is, that property vested in a body of persons ought not to be laid, in an indictment charging a party with the larceny of the same, as the property of that body, unless such body is incorporated, but should be described as belonging to the individuals composing the company.\n2. So where, in an indictment for larceny, it was charged that the property alleged to have been stolen >vas the property of the \u201cAmerican Merchants\u2019 Union Express Company,\u201d in the absence of an averment that such company was a corporation, it was held, that the ownership of the property was defectively stated, and the overruling of defendant\u2019s motion, to quash the indictment on that ground, was fatal to the judgment.\nWbit of Error to the Circuit Court of Perry county; the Hon. M. C. Crawford, Judge, presiding.\nMr. Edward \"V. Pierce, for the plaintiff in error. ."
  },
  "file_name": "0451-01",
  "first_page_order": 453,
  "last_page_order": 454
}