{
  "id": 5306657,
  "name": "James Williams et al. v. Francis La Valle, Supervisor, etc.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Williams v. La Valle",
  "decision_date": "1872-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "110",
  "last_page": "111",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "64 Ill. 110"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 142,
    "char_count": 1899,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.48,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.4299581128486498e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6510898897966638
    },
    "sha256": "33a31b851291109326e4fbdff852e21a4e1ec6e1a893246dbbd0e779490e491f",
    "simhash": "1:8c4f4c50989ae478",
    "word_count": 339
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:22:19.635879+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "James Williams et al. v. Francis La Valle, Supervisor, etc."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam :\nThe order granting a new trial in this case, is not a final judgment. Hence, no appeal can be taken or writ of error prosecuted for its reversal. The writ of error must therefore be dismissed.\nWrit of error dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam :"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. C. W. & E. L. Thomas, for the plaintiffs in error.",
      "Messrs. G. & G. A. K cerner, for the defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "James Williams et al. v. Francis La Valle, Supervisor, etc.\n\u2022TraDGirENT\u2014whether final\u2014or\u00fc&r granting a new trial. An order granting a new trial in an action of ejectment, under the statute, is not a final judgment, and, therefore, can not he reviewed in the supreme court upon appeal or writ of error.\nWrit op Error to the Circuit Court of St. Clair county; the Hon. Joseph Gillespie, Judge, presiding.\nThis was an action of ejectment, brought in the court below \u25a0by LaYalle, supervisor of the village of Cahokia, against James Williams and Francis H. Cobb.\nAt the March term, 1868, a trial ivas had, resulting in a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, from which the defendants prayed an appeal. At the October term following, the judgment was vacated and a new trial granted upon payment of costs, the defendants withdrawing their appeal.\nAt the October term, 1870, a second trial ivas had, resulting in a judgment in favor of the defendants. The plaintiff thereupon moved for a new trial, which the court, at the March term,_ 1871, denied. The plaintiff then moved for a new trial under the statute, which ivas allowed upon the payment of costs within one year. Upon this application of the plaintiff it Avas proven that he had paid the costs of the second trial, but had not paid the costs of the first trial.\nAt the October term, 1871, the plaintiff dismissed his suit.\nThe defendants sued out a Avrit of error, and insist the court beloAV erred in granting to the plaintiff a neAV trial Avithout the payment of all the costs incurred in the suit.\nMessrs. C. W. & E. L. Thomas, for the plaintiffs in error.\nMessrs. G. & G. A. K cerner, for the defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0110-01",
  "first_page_order": 110,
  "last_page_order": 111
}