{
  "id": 865083,
  "name": "The Pennsylvania Co. v. Henry Marshall",
  "name_abbreviation": "Pennsylvania Co. v. Marshall",
  "decision_date": "1886-01-06",
  "docket_number": "No. 80-2194",
  "first_page": "639",
  "last_page": "640",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "18 Ill. App. 639"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 148,
    "char_count": 1535,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.505,
    "sha256": "1793c75fc6e921ea1498401f80764eff6022880caf20ba4ba1226e39a33f6674",
    "simhash": "1:c0ff35fa14ec51fe",
    "word_count": 268
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:14:19.454599+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "The Pennsylvania Co. v. Henry Marshall."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Opinion Per Curiam.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": null
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorneys, for appellant, Messrs. Willard & Dbiggs;",
      "for appellee, Mr. Moeton Culveb and Mr. Simon P. Douthabt."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "No. 80\u20142194.\nThe Pennsylvania Co. v. Henry Marshall.\nThis was an action on the case brought by appellee against appellant to recover damages for the death of his son, caused by being run over by a train of appellant\u2019s railroad cars in the vicinity of Grove and 18th streets, in Chicago, through the alleged careless and negligent management of the train by defendant\u2019s servants. There was a jury trial resulting in a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff for \u00a72,999. The evidence tended to show that the train consisted of twenty freight cars and an engine, and was something over 690 feet long - that the engine, instead of being at the head of the train, was in the rear pushing the train, and there was no flag or other signal at the approaching end of the train to warn passers-by of danger. The court is of opinion that the company was guilty of culpable negligence in backing a long train of cars through a busy part of the city, where people andt\u00e9ams were constantly passing and repassing, without using special precautions, either by having a person stationed on the train or on the ground or in some other practicable way, to give warning of the approach of the train. Ho material error is perceived in the instructions as modified and given by the court, and the court is of opinion that the evidence supports the finding of the jury.\nJudge below, Elliott Anthony.\nAttorneys, for appellant, Messrs. Willard & Dbiggs;\nfor appellee, Mr. Moeton Culveb and Mr. Simon P. Douthabt.\nOpinion filed Jan. 6, 1886."
  },
  "file_name": "0639-02",
  "first_page_order": 635,
  "last_page_order": 636
}