{
  "id": 2854819,
  "name": "Anna Von Der Osten, Administratrix, Appellee, v. Oscar Daniels Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Von Der Osten v. Oscar Daniels Co.",
  "decision_date": "1914-07-02",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 19,407",
  "first_page": "446",
  "last_page": "447",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "187 Ill. App. 446"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 220,
    "char_count": 2804,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.55,
    "sha256": "1a06bf94f5956aebdc298abc2d6dac212ed1cca5ead34c1fdbcf7388648cb025",
    "simhash": "1:dd71abd4ec08c14d",
    "word_count": 468
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:57:10.884591+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Anna Von Der Osten, Administratrix, Appellee, v. Oscar Daniels Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Pam\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Pam"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Eddy, Wetten & Pegler, for appellant.",
      "John A. Bloomingston, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Anna Von Der Osten, Administratrix, Appellee, v. Oscar Daniels Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 19,407.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Samuel C. Stough, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1913.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed July 2, 1914.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Anna Von Der Osten, administratrix of the estate of Max Von Der Osten, deceased, against Oscar Daniels Company to recover damages for wrongfully causing the death of plaintiff\u2019s intestate. The deceased was employed as a carpenter by the Eudolph S. Blome Company, and while carrying boards near a certain opening or shaft in close proximity with a certain beam or leg which defendant\u2019s servants were moving such beam or leg fell down upon a board which plaintiff was carrying so that he lost his balance and fell into the shaft or opening, a distance of about seventy feet, and was killed. To reverse a judgment in favor of plaintiff for five thousand dollars, defendant appeals.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Negligence, \u00a7 188 \u2014when evidence warrants finding that person killed uxts in exercise of due care. In an action for the wrongful death of plaintiff\u2019s intestate alleged to have been caused by the negligence of defendant\u2019s servants in moving a certain beam or leg on a building in course of construction, near where the plaintiff\u2019s intestate was carrying boards so as to cause the beam to fall on a board which deceased was carrying and cause him to lose his balance and fall, evidence held sufficient to warrant a finding by the jury that the deceased was in the exercise of due care for his safety.\n2. Negligence, \u00a7 226*\u2014when instruction as to degree of care required of person killed not prejudicial. In an action for wrongful death resulting from negligence, an instruction telling the jury that \u201cthe law did not require the plaintiff\u2019s intestate the highest degree of care,\u201d held not prejudicial, it appearing that an instruction given on behalf of defendant stated the degree of care which defendant claims the plaintiff intestate was compelled to exercise.\n3. Appeal and ebbob, \u00a7 1679*\u2014when variance for want of amendment to declaration waived. Where plaintiff during the trial asked for leave to amend the declaration but no such amendment was ever made, the defendant on review cannot urge there was a material variance between the declaration and the evidence on the assumption that the declaration was not in fact amended, where in his pleadings and an instruction offered by him he recognized the amendment.\nEddy, Wetten & Pegler, for appellant.\nJohn A. Bloomingston, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0446-01",
  "first_page_order": 472,
  "last_page_order": 473
}