{
  "id": 2848714,
  "name": "Harry de Joannis, Appellee, v. Domestic Engineering Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "de Joannis v. Domestic Engineering Co.",
  "decision_date": "1914-03-09",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 18,803",
  "first_page": "271",
  "last_page": "274",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "185 Ill. App. 271"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "228 Ill. 346",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5627801
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/228/0346-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "242 Ill. 409",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5653655
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/242/0409-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 300,
    "char_count": 5210,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.489,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.584026374442844e-08,
      "percentile": 0.5259733289469772
    },
    "sha256": "985d80d32532de5bf640e778a3d543f633daf344ed74b8fceff7b49aa82ed6dd",
    "simhash": "1:d9a48d0d00b0afd0",
    "word_count": 866
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:43:38.716309+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Harry de Joannis, Appellee, v. Domestic Engineering Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Baker\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThis is an action for an alleged wrongful discharge of the plaintiff from the employment of the defendant, in which plaintiff recovered six hundred and ninety dollars, and the defendant appealed.\nAppellee\u2019s contention that there is in the record no bill of exceptions is without merit. The record states that on a certain day there was filed in the cause a certain bill of exceptions in words and figures as follows, to wit, and then follows a bill of exceptions duly signed and sealed by the trial judge. This bill of exceptions became a part of the record by such signing, but prior to the enactment of the present statute the clerk was not permitted to incorporate into a transcript of the record the original bill of exceptions. The statute authorizes this to be done on stipulation, and in this case the parties by their attorneys stipulated that the original bill of exceptions might be incorporated into the \u201crecord\u201d in lieu of a copy thereof. The bill of exceptions, as has been said, was already a part of the record. The word \u201crecord\u201d in the stipulation was used for and in place of the words \u201ctranscript of the record,\u201d and pursuant to the stipulation the clerk properly inserted the original bill of exceptions into the transcript of the record filed in this court.\nThe only controverted question in the case was whether the plaintiff, de Joannis, resigned, as defendant contended, or was discharged by defendant, as plaintiff contended. On this question four witnesses called by the defendant testified that plaintiff resigned and that his resignation was accepted by the president of the defendant corporation, and only the plaintiff testified that he was discharged. 'The Court, at the request of the plaintiff, gave to the jury the following instruction:\n\u201cThe jury are instructed that the preponderance of evidence does not consist alone in the greater number of witnesses testifying to a particular fact or state of facts.\nIn determining upon which side the preponderance of the evidence is, the jury should take into consideration the opportunities of the several witnesses for seeing or knowing the things about which they are testifying, their conduct and demeanor while testifying, their apparent candor and fairness, their interest or lack of interest, if auy, in the result of the suit and the probability or improbability of the truth of their several statements in view of the evidence, facts and circumstances proved on the trial and from all these circumstances determine upon which side is the weight or preponderance of the evidence. \u2019 \u2019\nIn Lyons v. Joseph T. Ryerson S Son, 242 Ill. 409, an instruction for the plaintiff advised the jury that the preponderance in a case \u201cis not alone necessarily determined by the number of witnesses,\u201d and then follows an enumeration of the matters proper to be considered by the jury, omitting the number of witnesses testifying for and against, and it was said, p. 417: \u201cIn Chicago Union Traction Co. v. Hampe, 228 Ill. 346, and Elgin, Joliet and Eastern Railway Co. v. Lawlor, 229 id. 621, it was held that a similar instruction should not have omitted this element. In view of the fact that the appellee\u2019s case rested very largely upon his own testimony and that more witnesses testified for appellant than for himself, this instruction might have misled the jury on this point.\u201d\nIn this case appellee\u2019s case rested entirely on his own testimony and against him, was the testimony of four witnesses.\nWe think that the giving of the instruction in question in this case was reversible error, and for that error the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.\nReversed and remanded.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Baker"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Moses, Rosenthal & Kennedy, for appellant; Walter Bachbach, of counsel.",
      "Culver, Andrews & King, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Harry de Joannis, Appellee, v. Domestic Engineering Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 18,803.\n1. Appeal and error, g 775 \u2014when bill of exceptions becomes part of the record. A hill of exceptions becomes a part of the record by being signed and sealed by the trial judge.\n2. Appeal and error, g 903 \u2014when original bill of exceptions is incorporated in the transcript of record. The original bill of exceptions held properly incorporated in the transcript of the record by a stipulation of the parties, though the word \u201crecord\u201d in the stipulation was used for and in the place of the words \u201ctranscript of the record.\u201d\n3. Instructions, \u00a7 89 \u2014when instruction on question of preponderance of evidence omitting number of witnesses reversible error. An instruction given for plaintiff advising the jury that the preponderance of the evidence does not consist alone in the greater number of witnesses testifying and then enumerating certain matters to be considered by the jury, omitting the number of witnesses testifying for and against,aTield reversible error.\nAppeal from the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. W. F. Slater, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the October term, 1912.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed March 9, 1914.\nMoses, Rosenthal & Kennedy, for appellant; Walter Bachbach, of counsel.\nCulver, Andrews & King, for appellee.\nSeo Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, same topic and section number.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Yola. XI to XV, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0271-01",
  "first_page_order": 297,
  "last_page_order": 300
}