{
  "id": 2713297,
  "name": "The Smith Bridge Company v. The Louisville, New Albany and St. Louis Air Line Railway Co.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Smith Bridge Co. v. Louisville, New Albany & St. Louis Air Line Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1874-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "506",
  "last_page": "507",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "72 Ill. 506"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 122,
    "char_count": 1750,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.5,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.3844881880289853e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7971613402943569
    },
    "sha256": "c0fd6b5c5bcd96dff39231387e4d32f1c8631c0267d21aa315d1fa59ccb36f26",
    "simhash": "1:4344090e2a59a41e",
    "word_count": 307
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:43:15.201732+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "The Smith Bridge Company v. The Louisville, New Albany and St. Louis Air Line Railway Co."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice McAllister\ndelivered the opinion of the Court:\nThe declaration in this case contains two counts, the first of which is framed under sections one and five of the act of 1869, giving a mechanic\u2019s lien to sub-contractors. The allegations show, that plaintiff in error was a contractor under a sub-contractor. The second is the ordinary common count. The defendant demurred to the first count, and filed the general issue to the second. The court sustained the demurrer to the first count, and the cause is still pending upon the second, and the general issue filed thereto. Upon this state of the record the plaintiff brought error to this court.\nWhile we are of opinion that the demurrer was properly-sustained to the first count, on the ground that the statute does not extend to a sub-contraetor of a sub-contractor, yet we can not affirm the judgment. There was no final judgment to which a writ of error will lie.\nThe writ will, therefore, be dismissed.\nWrit of error dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice McAllister"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. S. Z. Landes, for the plaintiff in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The Smith Bridge Company v. The Louisville, New Albany and St. Louis Air Line Railway Co.\n1. Writ or error\u2014to what judgment it will lie. Where there was a demurrer filed to the first count of a declaration, and a plea of the general issue to the second count, the judgment of the. court sustaining the demurrer to the first count leaves the cause pending upon the second count, and the general issue filed thereto, and there is no final judgment to which a writ of error will lie.\n3. Mechanic\u2019s lien\u2014who entitled thereto. The Mechanic\u2019s Lien Law of 1869 does not extend to a sub-contractor of a sub-contractor.\nWrit oe Error to the Circuit Court of Wabash county; the Hon. Tazewell B. Tanner, Judge, presiding.\nMr. S. Z. Landes, for the plaintiff in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0506-01",
  "first_page_order": 506,
  "last_page_order": 507
}