{
  "id": 6045501,
  "name": "Peoria, Decatur and Evansville Ry. Co. v. W. H. Purviance",
  "name_abbreviation": "Peoria, Decatur & Evansville Ry. Co. v. Purviance",
  "decision_date": "1884-05-22",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "112",
  "last_page": "113",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "15 Ill. App. 112"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "27 Ill. 41",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5250138
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/27/0041-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "35 Ohio, 147",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ohio",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "40 Ill. 280",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        425823
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/40/0280-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "27 Ill. 30",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5250422
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/27/0030-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "27 Ill. 41",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5250138
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/27/0041-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 182,
    "char_count": 2166,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.527,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.249885799096315e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3860572566199805
    },
    "sha256": "80994cc2ddbdc5401a2c6632049a490118ba1ceb707944e68df6ec32411e34a4",
    "simhash": "1:3291778b2e4932b3",
    "word_count": 396
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:31:21.776284+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Peoria, Decatur and Evansville Ry. Co. v. W. H. Purviance."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Davis, J.\nThis action was' brought by appellee to recover the value of eight hogs alleged to have been killed by a train on the railroad of appellant, and also to recover attorney\u2019s fees given by statute.\nThe jury found a verdict for appellee of $78.50, and a judgment was rendered against appellant for that amount by the court below, and to reverse the judgment this appeal was taken.\nit is claimed by appellant that the evidence given on the trial failed to show that the railroad had been open for use six months before the hogs were killed. It has been frequently held by the courts of this State, that to entitle a party to a recovery in cases of this kind, it must be shown that the railroad against which the suit is brought had been open for use six months before the injury complained of. The O. & M. Railroad Company v. Levi H. Jones, 27 Ill. 41; Same v. Meisenheimer, 27 Ill. 30; Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co. v. Neikirk, 13 Bradwell, 387.\nThis is a technical defense interposed, but while the statute remains as it is and the cases cited remain- unreversed, we must treat the defense as valid.\nThe record of the case now before us shows that no evidence whatever was offered of the time when the road of appellant was first opened for use, or that it had been opened for use six months before the hogs were injured or killed, for which a recovery is now sought. We are compelled, therefore, to reverse the judgment and remand the case.\nJudgment reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Davis, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Eliott & IIoblit, for appellant;",
      "Messrs. Beach & IIodnett, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Peoria, Decatur and Evansville Ry. Co. v. W. H. Purviance.\nStock bniAl\u00edr\u00bb BY BAn,uoAD 'Ti\u00edatn.\u2014To entitle a party to recover for stock killed by a train, and for attorneys\u2019 fees as given by statute, it must be shown that the railroad against which the suit is brought had been open for use six months before the injury complained of.\nAfcPEAL from the Circuit Court of Logan county; the Hon. G-. W. Herman, Judge, presiding.\nOpinion filed May 22, 1884.\nMessrs. Eliott & IIoblit, for appellant;\ncited C. & A. Ry Co. v. Taylor, 40 Ill. 280; 1 Redfield on Railways, \u00a7 32; B. & C. Ry. Co. v. McElroy, 35 Ohio, 147; O. & M. Ry. Co. v. Jones, 27 Ill. 41.\nMessrs. Beach & IIodnett, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0112-01",
  "first_page_order": 116,
  "last_page_order": 117
}