{
  "id": 2763003,
  "name": "Mary Nettlehorst, Defendant in Error, v. F. S. Mordaunt, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Nettlehorst v. Mordaunt",
  "decision_date": "1912-10-03",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 16,703",
  "first_page": "42",
  "last_page": "43",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "173 Ill. App. 42"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 129,
    "char_count": 1593,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.502,
    "sha256": "a28bc044bed7a9c945c423ab029d7d7f9f3143b694468ae3fce055c8133ee527",
    "simhash": "1:977b8c74155fa0bc",
    "word_count": 257
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:18:39.035248+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Mary Nettlehorst, Defendant in Error, v. F. S. Mordaunt, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice McSurely\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nMary Nettlehorst, hereinafter called the plaintiff, recovered a judgment against F. S. Mordaunt, hereinafter called the defendant, for injuries received by being bitten by a dog belonging to the defendant.\nIt would serve no useful purpose to relate the circumstances of the affair. It is sufficient to say that the verdict finding the defendant guilty, was justified by the evidence.\nWe do not agree with counsel for defendant in his contention that the trial court committed error in its rulings upon evidence, or that the conduct of opposing counsel constituted prejudicial error.\nThe verdict of the jury was for $600, which under the direction'of the trial court was remitted to $400.\nThe plaintiff was bitten upon both arms and will retain permanent scars. She suffered great pain and a nervous shock. We cannot say that the amount of the judgment is excessive.\nTherefore the judgment will be affirmed.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice McSurely"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Percival Steele, for plaintiff in error.",
      "Foreman, Levin & Robertson, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Mary Nettlehorst, Defendant in Error, v. F. S. Mordaunt, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 16,703.\nDamages\u2014not excessive. A verdict for six hundred dollars reduced by remittitur to four hundred dollars is not excessive, where a plaintiff, bitten upon both arms by a dog, suffered great pain and nervous shock and will retain permanent scars.\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Edwin K. Walker, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1910.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed October 3, 1912.\nPercival Steele, for plaintiff in error.\nForeman, Levin & Robertson, for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0042-01",
  "first_page_order": 60,
  "last_page_order": 61
}
