{
  "id": 5207774,
  "name": "Donald A. Hocker, a Minor, Donna Lynn Hocker, a Minor, Harry W. Hocker, a Minor, by Vivian I. Hooker, Their Mother and Next Friend, and Vivian I. Hooker, Individually, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Max O'Klock, d/b/a White Mule and Rene Van Nevel, d/b/a Van's Club, Defendants-Appellants",
  "name_abbreviation": "Hocker v. O'Klock",
  "decision_date": "1960-02-08",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 11,097",
  "first_page": "259",
  "last_page": "262",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "24 Ill. App. 2d 259"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "401 Ill. 172",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5306986
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/401/0172-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "331 Ill. App. 143",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5058518
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/331/0143-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "335 Ill. App. 222",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5017633
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/335/0222-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "11 Ill.App.2d 330",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5160542
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-2d/11/0330-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "16 Ill.App.2d 197",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5178392
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-2d/16/0197-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "169 Ill. App. 540",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        2783281
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/169/0540-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "16 Ill.2d 414",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        2763006
      ],
      "year": 1953,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/16/0414-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "16 Ill.App.2d 414",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5177601
      ],
      "year": 1953,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-2d/16/0414-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 288,
    "char_count": 3634,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.544,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.8230933728089473e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7194873137391408
    },
    "sha256": "6343191967ab219aec70a608cd0b06fed4eca5a239bf6ac0ada2981e15caf7ed",
    "simhash": "1:d18f9c1e8e3d3786",
    "word_count": 588
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:35:04.233078+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "CROW and WRIGHT, JJ., concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "Donald A. Hocker, a Minor, Donna Lynn Hocker, a Minor, Harry W. Hocker, a Minor, by Vivian I. Hooker, Their Mother and Next Friend, and Vivian I. Hooker, Individually, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Max O\u2019Klock, d/b/a White Mule and Rene Van Nevel, d/b/a Van\u2019s Club, Defendants-Appellants."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PRESIDING JUSTICE SOLFISBURG\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThe prior opinion of this court (16 Ill.App.2d 414) and the opinion of the Supreme Court reversing our decision, Hocker v. O\u2019Klock, 16 Ill.2d 414, set forth the facts of this case with sufficient detail so that they need not be repeated here. The action under the Dram Shop Act (Chapter 43, Section 135, Ill. Rev. Stats. 1953) was brought by Donald Hooker\u2019s dependents for loss of means of support. Upon the trial before a jury verdicts and judgments for the plaintiffs against the defendants aggregating $20,000 ensued.\nOn appeal, this court held that the identity of the deceased\u2019s assailant had not been proved by any evidence and reversed the judgment of the Circuit Court of Rock Island County. The Supreme Court of Illinois reversed the decision of this court. It held that the evidence establishing the chain of circumstances constituted a reasonable basis for the jury\u2019s conclusion that the alleged intoxicated person killed Donald Hocker and that such conclusion was \u201cmore probable\u201d under the relevant and uncontroverted facts and circumstances.\nThe cause was remanded to this court with directions to consider other errors assigned.\nThe defendants briefed and argued several points in urging reversal. Those points concerned with alleged errors in the giving and refusing of instructions and the alleged erroneous admission of opinion testimony of the coroner of Eock Island County as to the time of Hooker\u2019s death were all decided adversely to defendants in our prior opinion. We note that the Supreme Court concurred in our decisions upon these points.\nThe remaining assignment of error by defendants is that the verdicts against them are contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence. The principles governing the analysis of the evidence have been often repeated and are well established. The verdict must be clearly against the preponderance of the evidence, and it is the duty of the Appellate Court not to reverse a verdict on disputed questions of fact, Baim v. Cadillac Automobile Co. of Illinois, 169 Ill. App. 540. When the opposite conclusion to that reached by the jury is not clearly evident, the jury\u2019s verdict should not be disturbed, Bogovich v. Schermer, 16 Ill.App.2d 197, and some courts have even stated that the necessity of an opposite conclusion must appear from the evidence, DeLong v. Whitehead, 11 Ill.App.2d 330. The question of fact raised by the proof need only be a fair one, Krug v. Armour & Co., 335 Ill. App. 222, or as summarized in one decision, the word \u201cmanifest\u201d means \u201cclearly evident, clear, plain, indisputable,\u201d Schneiderman v. Interstate Transit Lines, 331 Ill. App. 143, affirmed 401 Ill. 172. In the light of these principles and the factual questions raised by the direct and circumstantial evidence before the jury, we cannot hold that the verdict of the jury was against the manifest weight of the evidence. Accordingly, the judgments of the Circuit Court of Rock Island County are affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nCROW and WRIGHT, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PRESIDING JUSTICE SOLFISBURG"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Virgil Bozeman and Sam F. Skafidas, of Moline, Frank G. Schubert, of Rock Island, for appellants.",
      "Eagle and Eagle, of Rock Island, and Robert H. White, of Geneseo, for appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Donald A. Hocker, a Minor, Donna Lynn Hocker, a Minor, Harry W. Hocker, a Minor, by Vivian I. Hooker, Their Mother and Next Friend, and Vivian I. Hooker, Individually, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Max O\u2019Klock, d/b/a White Mule and Rene Van Nevel, d/b/a Van\u2019s Club, Defendants-Appellants.\nGen. No. 11,097.\nSecond District, Second Division.\nFebruary 8, 1960.\nReleased for publication February 25, 1960.\nVirgil Bozeman and Sam F. Skafidas, of Moline, Frank G. Schubert, of Rock Island, for appellants.\nEagle and Eagle, of Rock Island, and Robert H. White, of Geneseo, for appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0259-01",
  "first_page_order": 269,
  "last_page_order": 272
}