{
  "id": 5308593,
  "name": "William F. Tucker et al. v. Joseph M. Watte",
  "name_abbreviation": "Tucker v. Watte",
  "decision_date": "1872-09",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "416",
  "last_page": "417",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "64 Ill. 416"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 119,
    "char_count": 1202,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.529,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.5519492643724948e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6747800740506493
    },
    "sha256": "8cdccde23a28919fa51449ecd25346f3b9d81891d608ca4693d461571aff9309",
    "simhash": "1:982b2ca5a6458b20",
    "word_count": 212
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:22:19.635879+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "William F. Tucker et al. v. Joseph M. Watte."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam:\nThis is a case depending wholly upon a question of fact. It wras submitted for trial to the court without a jury. The testimony is conflicting. The witnesses were few in number, and the court below, hearing and seeing them, could better determine the credit to be given to the testimony of each one than we can do. While we entertain some doubt as to the correctness of the finding, we do not feel authorized to reverse the judgment.\nThe judgment of the court below is affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam:"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Richardson & Hull, for the appellants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "William F. Tucker et al. v. Joseph M. Watte.\nNew trial\u2014verdict against the evidence. In this case the court refuse to disturb the finding of the court below on the ground, as urged, that the evidence fails to support such finding.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Lambert Tree, Judge, presiding.\nThis was an action of trespass on the ease, brought by William F. Tucker and John B. Sherman against Joseph M. Watte. The defendant filed a plea of not guilty, upon which issue was joined; and upon a trial before the court, a jury being waived, judgment was rendered in favor of the defendant for costs. The plaintiffs appeal.\nMessrs. Richardson & Hull, for the appellants."
  },
  "file_name": "0416-01",
  "first_page_order": 416,
  "last_page_order": 417
}