{
  "id": 2851605,
  "name": "Owen Monahan, Appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Monahan v. Chicago City Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1914-02-17",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 18,823",
  "first_page": "207",
  "last_page": "208",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "185 Ill. App. 207"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 267,
    "char_count": 3152,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.524,
    "sha256": "c36cea6edf2a279e20f594b5cbe744641f52d253b023ccc2f4bef2459c3b7db5",
    "simhash": "1:8b17988c0aa10979",
    "word_count": 522
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:43:38.716309+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Owen Monahan, Appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Clark\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n2. Instructions, \u00a7 88 \u2014preponderance of evidence. An instruction that: \u201cThe preponderance of evidence in a case is not necessarily alone determined by the number of witnesses testifying to a particular fact or state of facts. In determining upon which side the preponderance of evidence is, the jury should also take' into consideration, so far as shown by the evidence, the opportunities of the several witnesses for seeing or knowing, the things about which they testify, their conduct and demeanor while testifying, their interest or lack of interest, if any, in the result of the suit; the probability or improbability of the truth of their several statements, in view of all the evidence, facts and circumstances proved on the trial; and from all these circumstances, and a full consideration of all the evidence, determine upon which side is the greater iveight or preponderance of the evidence,\u201d if erroneous is not prejudicial.\n3. Aepeai. and error, \u00a7 1563 \u2014when refusal of instruction to disregard declaration harmless. Refusal of an instruction-that plaintiff could not recover under the original declaration is not prejudicial, where there was evidence to support an additional count of the declaration.\n4. Damages, \u00a7 124 \u2014when verdict not excessive. A- verdict for six thousand dollars in favor of a man seventy years of age, whose earnings prior to the accident were about one hundred dollars per month, is not excessive for injuries consisting of a fracture of the neck of the left femur, making the shaft of that leg. about three-quarters of an inch higher than it should be and incapacitating him from work for a period of nearly three years.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Clark"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Franklin B. Hussey and Watson J. Ferry, for appellant; Leonard A. Busby, of counsel.",
      "James C. McShane, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Owen Monahan, Appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 18,823.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Carriers, \u00a7 476 \u2014jerks on alighting sufficiency of evidence. Testimony of plaintiff that as he was preparing to alight from defendant\u2019s car it stopped suddenly throwing him against the end of the car, and as he raised his foot to get on the step \u201cit shot right ahead again\u201d and he was thrown to the ground, supported by the testimony of another witness, held sufficient to sustain a verdict in Ms favor, though disputed by testimony of the conductor and motorman of the car and another passenger.\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. William H. McSurely, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1912.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed February 17, 1914.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Owen Monahan against Chicago City Eailway Company to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by plaintiff on being thrown from defendant\u2019s car by a sudden jerk as he was preparing to alight. From a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for six thousand dollars, defendant appeals.\nFranklin B. Hussey and Watson J. Ferry, for appellant; Leonard A. Busby, of counsel.\nJames C. McShane, for appellee.\n6ee Illinois Notes Digest, Yois. XI to XV, same topic and section number.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Yols. XI to XV, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0207-01",
  "first_page_order": 233,
  "last_page_order": 234
}