{
  "id": 5319900,
  "name": "W. L. Connon, Plaintiff in Error, v. Florence M. Spofford, Defendant in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Connon v. Spofford",
  "decision_date": "1911-01-24",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 15,368",
  "first_page": "536",
  "last_page": "537",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "159 Ill. App. 536"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 126,
    "char_count": 1493,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.523,
    "sha256": "4a8baedca5adfb4a74abdc564c913dfb6da5cf89663f8be4a39ab9b784519760",
    "simhash": "1:4726500cb47a89b8",
    "word_count": 251
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:33:35.030835+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "W. L. Connon, Plaintiff in Error, v. Florence M. Spofford, Defendant in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Smith\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThe plaintiff in error, W. L. Connon, brought an action in the Municipal Court of Chicago against the defendant in error, Florence M. Spofford, to recover damages alleged to have been caused by the defendant in error by running her automobile into the horse and buggy of the plaintiff and injuring his horse. The cause was tried before the court without a jury, and the defendant had judgment.\nNo questions of law are involved. The sole question before us is one of fact, namely: was the defendant in the action guilty of negligence which caused the injury to plaintiff\u2019s property?\nWe have carefully read and considered the evidence, and the arguments of counsel, and we are unable to say that the finding and judgment of the trial court is manifestly against the weight of the evidence. In our opinion the preponderance of the evidence sustains the judgment.\nThe judgment is therefore affirmed.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Smith"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "M. L. Thackaberry, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Robert J. Slater, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "W. L. Connon, Plaintiff in Error, v. Florence M. Spofford, Defendant in Error.\nGen. No. 15,368.\nVerdicts\u2014when not disturbed as against the evidence. A verdict will not be set aside on review as against the evidence unless clearly and manifestly against its weight.\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. H. H. Kerr, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1909.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed January 24, 1911.\nM. L. Thackaberry, for plaintiff in error.\nRobert J. Slater, for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0536-01",
  "first_page_order": 554,
  "last_page_order": 555
}