{
  "id": 5368818,
  "name": "Joseph Studer, Appellee, v. Chicago, Lake Shore & South Bend Railway Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Studer v. Chicago, Lake Shore & South Bend Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1914-04-23",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 18,982",
  "first_page": "110",
  "last_page": "111",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "186 Ill. App. 110"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 182,
    "char_count": 2252,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.548,
    "sha256": "aaedb1d343d08c9c83dac507cfac815a4697547a24cd5aad3d1f5a035be163ac",
    "simhash": "1:83dd8ba550083abc",
    "word_count": 367
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:18:25.002075+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Joseph Studer, Appellee, v. Chicago, Lake Shore & South Bend Railway Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Scanlan\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Scanlan"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "F. J. Lewis Meyer and M. C. Zacharias, for appellant; Samuel K. Markman, of counsel.",
      "George D. Wellington and Rockhold & Busch, for appellee; Francis X. Busch, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Joseph Studer, Appellee, v. Chicago, Lake Shore & South Bend Railway Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 18,982.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Thomas G. Windes, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1912.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed April 23, 1914.\nRehearing denied May 7, 1914.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Joseph Studer against Chicago, Lake Shore & South Bend Bailway Company to recover for injuries sustained at a certain street crossing in Indiana Harbor, Indiana, resulting from being struck by defendant\u2019s electric cars while plaintiff was attempting to drive across defendant\u2019s tracks. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff for $15,000, defendant appeals.\nF. J. Lewis Meyer and M. C. Zacharias, for appellant; Samuel K. Markman, of counsel.\nGeorge D. Wellington and Rockhold & Busch, for appellee; Francis X. Busch, of counsel.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Railroads, \u00a7 733 \u2014when recovery for injuries resulting from collision at crossing sustained hy the evidence. In an action against a railway company for injuries sustained by plaintiff in a collision while attempting to drive across defendant\u2019s tracks at a street intersection, a verdict for plaintiff held sustained by the evidence.\n2. Railroads, \u00a7 772 \u2014when refusal of requested instructions proper. In an action against a railroad company for injuries resulting from a collision while plaintiff was attempting to drive across the tracks of defendant at a street intersection a requested instruction which was argumentative and stated, without qualification, that a man is presumed to have seen whatever was within the range of his vision and to have heard whatever was in the range of his hearing, held properly refused.\n3. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1265 \u2014when law of another State presumed the same as in this State. Where there is no evidence in the bill of exceptions to show that the law of another State applicable to certain instructions is different than the law in this State, it will be presumed that it is the same as the law of this State.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0110-01",
  "first_page_order": 156,
  "last_page_order": 157
}