{
  "id": 2849741,
  "name": "Minnie J. Christiansen, Defendant in Error v. James R. Navigato and Joseph Del Re, Plaintiffs in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Christiansen v. Navigato",
  "decision_date": "1914-03-09",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 18,665",
  "first_page": "318",
  "last_page": "319",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "185 Ill. App. 318"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 176,
    "char_count": 1987,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.525,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.0011153170616546e-08,
      "percentile": 0.31492588950166595
    },
    "sha256": "ce27ff21de0bbb9de79e176e3bba59a7464b83c8ff7fdc1139ed33014e7f26a1",
    "simhash": "1:15eb90aff008e0ec",
    "word_count": 338
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:43:38.716309+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Minnie J. Christiansen, Defendant in Error v. James R. Navigato and Joseph Del Re, Plaintiffs in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice McSurely\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice McSurely"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Comerford & Cohen, for plaintiffs in error.",
      "LeBosky & Plumb and T. D. Hurley, for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Minnie J. Christiansen, Defendant in Error v. James R. Navigato and Joseph Del Re, Plaintiffs in Error.\nGen. No. 18,665.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Negligence, \u00a7 198 \u2014when contributory negligence is a question of law. Contributory negligence is not a question of law merely because the facts are not disputed. Not only must the evidentiary facts be undisputed, but all reasonable minds must agree as to the conclusion to be drawn therefrom before such a question can be said to be one of law.\n2. Landlord and tenant, \u00a7.259 \u2014when question of contributory negligence of tenant injured by board walk is for jury. In an action against landlords for injuries sustained by a tenant caused by a defective board walk on the premises, the facts showed that plaintiff had knowledge of the defective condition of the walk and had complained of it to defendants, who made no promise to repair, and that plaintiff on returning home in the evening tripped on a loose hoard which caused her to fall forward, stepping heavily upon a board which broke. Held that the question of plaintiff\u2019s contributory negligence was for the jury, and that refusal of' court to direct a verdict for defendant was not error.\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Frederick L. Fake, Jb., Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the October term, 1912.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed March 9, 1914.\nStatement of the Case,\nAction by Minnie J. Christiansen against James E. Navigato and Joseph Del Ee to recover damages for an injury to plaintiff\u2019s anlde caused by a defective board walk leading to a rear flat occupied by plaintiff as a tenant of the defendants. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff for three hundred dollars, defendant brings error.\nComerford & Cohen, for plaintiffs in error.\nLeBosky & Plumb and T. D. Hurley, for defendant in error.\nSeo Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0318-01",
  "first_page_order": 344,
  "last_page_order": 345
}