{
  "id": 2860106,
  "name": "Ernst R. Lindner, Appellee, v Kniseley Brothers, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Lindner v. Kniseley Bros.",
  "decision_date": "1914-07-02",
  "docket_number": "Gen No. 19,376",
  "first_page": "444",
  "last_page": "446",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "187 Ill. App. 444"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 249,
    "char_count": 3546,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.569,
    "sha256": "4069eff03b14ccd9d2d8f2802978115678b3c62159710bcb6a473038d109931d",
    "simhash": "1:49413118ba2f723d",
    "word_count": 593
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:57:10.884591+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Ernst R. Lindner, Appellee, v Kniseley Brothers, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Pam\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n4. Appeal and errob, \u00a7 1561 \u2014when refusal of requested instruction harmless. Refusal of appellant\u2019s requested instruction covered by other instructions given for appellant held not prejudicial.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Pam"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "F. J. Canty and P. L. McArdle, for appellant.",
      "James C. McShane, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Ernst R. Lindner, Appellee, v Kniseley Brothers, Appellant.\nGen No. 19,376.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Charles A. McDonald, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1913.\nCertiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed July 2, 1914.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Ernst E. Lindner against Kniseley Brothers, a corporation, to recover damages for personal injuries sustained in an accident that occurred while certain additional stories were added to a building known as the Boston Store. Plaintiff was employed by the Otis Elevator Company and was working in the inside of an elevator shaft about the third floor from the top and defendant\u2019s employes were working at the top of the shaft. Defendant\u2019s employes in placing a board across the top of the shaft caused several bricks to fall down the shaft striking plaintiff on the head inflicting serious injury. From a judgment for plaintiff for five thousand dollars, defendant appeals.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Negligence, \u00a7 185 \u2014when evidence adduced on cross-examination does not bar recovery on count in declaration. In an action by a employe of a company against another company for personal injuries received by plaintiff, where it was averred in a count in the declaration that employes of defendant without any warning to plaintiff negligently placed a board over an elevator shaft in which plaintiff was working so as to cause bricks to fall on plaintiff, held that the fact that an employe of defendant called as a witness for plaintiff testified that he looked down the hatch before placing the board and saw no one therein and that he placed the board down lightly, was not conclusive against the right of plaintiff to recover under such count, it appearing that plaintiff was obliged to call such employe as his witness to establish the fact that the act complained of was the act of the defendant and that the testimony complained of was given on cross-examination over plaintiff\u2019s objection.\n2. Negligence, \u00a7 47*-\u2014proximate cause. Negligence in placing a board across the top of an elevator shaft which caused brick to become dislodged and fall down the shaft upon plaintiff, held to warrant the jury in finding that the act was the proximate cause of the jury.\n3. Customs and usages, \u00a7 26*\u2014admissibility. Where a servant of an elevator company while working in an elevator shaft was injured by the negligence of servants of another company working on the same building in placing a board across the top of an elevator shaft in which the servant of the former company was working so as to cause brick to fall on him, held in an action against the latter company for the injury that testimony of plaintiff\u2019s fellow-servants to show that there was a general custom for men engaged in the erection or repairing of a building to give notice to men working in elevator shafts before starting to work over their heads was admissible.\nF. J. Canty and P. L. McArdle, for appellant.\nJames C. McShane, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Tols XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0444-01",
  "first_page_order": 470,
  "last_page_order": 472
}