{
  "id": 2620980,
  "name": "Frederick Richards et al. v. Mahlon C. Donagho, Supervisor, etc.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Richards v. Donagho",
  "decision_date": "1872-09",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "73",
  "last_page": "74",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "66 Ill. 73"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "62 Ill. 321",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2608216
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/62/0321-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 152,
    "char_count": 1670,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.557,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.552284461341054e-08,
      "percentile": 0.44813713077480577
    },
    "sha256": "170f1f220dda08fda99e5425ad3d83dd36a852640ce1d1b0ee41976e731c4337",
    "simhash": "1:0dcc6046042d9dc5",
    "word_count": 272
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:46:41.963849+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Frederick Richards et al. v. Mahlon C. Donagho, Supervisor, etc."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Thornton\ndelivered the opinion of the Court:\nThe only question presented by this record was, after mature deliberation, settled by the opinion in Schall et al. v. Bowman, 62 Ill. 321.\nNotwithstanding the able and plausible argument made in this ease, the majority of the court adhere to the, opinion in the case referred to above.\nThe decree is therefore reversed and the cause remanded.\nDecree reversed..",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Thornton"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Mayo & Widmer, for the appellants.",
      "Messrs. Dickey, Boyle & Bicholson, for the appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Frederick Richards et al. v. Mahlon C. Donagho, Supervisor, etc.\nConstitution of 1870\u2014when sepa/rate a/rticles of, took effect\u2014municipal subscriptions. The separate articles of the constitution of 1870, which were submitted to a vote separately from the main instrument, and adopted, became a part of the organic law from and after the second day of July, 1870. Therefore, no corporate subscription could be made in aid of a railway corporation in pursuance of a vote had after that date, although an election had been called prior to such date, for such purpose\u2019\nAppeal from the County Court of LaSalle county; the Hon. Charles H. Gilman, Judge, presiding.\nThis was a bill in chancery, filed September 21,1871, by the appellants, tax-payers and residents of the township of Bruce, in LaSalle county, to restrain the appellee from making a subscription of \u00a715,000 to the capital stock of the Fairbury, Pontiac and Northwestern Bail road Company, and from executing and delivering to the company the bonds of the township.\nIt appeared that an election was called July 12, 1870, and held August 2, 1870, which resulted in favor of the proposed subscription.\nMessrs. Mayo & Widmer, for the appellants.\nMessrs. Dickey, Boyle & Bicholson, for the appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0073-01",
  "first_page_order": 73,
  "last_page_order": 74
}