{
  "id": 5387115,
  "name": "Iva Dallas, Appellee, v. East St. Louis & Suburban Railway Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Dallas v. East St. Louis & Suburban Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1914-07-28",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "420",
  "last_page": "421",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "188 Ill. App. 420"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 155,
    "char_count": 2102,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.577,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.0446031217563963e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7518971183262035
    },
    "sha256": "85548483c733301dc468f442fbad21e36a6779a249b96fa3f257d81246e7d342",
    "simhash": "1:c9b122b71a0d1431",
    "word_count": 354
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:17:45.032867+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Iva Dallas, Appellee, v. East St. Louis & Suburban Railway Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice McBride\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice McBride"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Williamson, Burroughs & Ryder, for appellant.",
      "Geers & Geers, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Iva Dallas, Appellee, v. East St. Louis & Suburban Railway Company, Appellant.\n(Not to Tbe reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Madison county; the Hon. William E. Hadlet, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 19\u00cd4.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed July 28, 1914.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Iva Dallas against East St. Louis & Suburban Railway Company to recover for personal injuries received by plaintiff by falling off one of defendant\u2019s cars at a street intersection. The declaration alleged that plaintiff was a passenger on one of defendant\u2019s cars, that she went to the rear platform of the car with the intention of alighting at a certain street intersection and that while she was waiting for the car to come to a stop the car was suddenly started forward with a jerk causing her to fall off the car. The plea of the general issue was filed. Upon the trial plaintiff obtained judgment for three thousand dollars. To reverse the judgment, defendant appeals.\nAbstract of the Decision.\nCarriers, \u00a7 476*\u2014when evidence insufficient to sustain recovery for injury resulting from sudden jerk of car. In an action against a street railroad company to recover for personal injuries received by plaintiff by falling off one of defendant\u2019s cars at a street intersection, where it was alleged that the plaintiff was standing on the rear platform waiting for the car to stop to enable her to alight \u00e1nd that the defendant negligently started its car forward with a jerk so that she fell off the car, held that a verdict for plaintiff was not sustained by the evidence, it not appearing from the evidence other than the testimony of plaintiff that the car was started with a jerk, and her testimony was contradicted by the testimony of the conductor, motorman and several passengers on the car, and several witnesses testified that the plaintiff did not stop on the rear platform but walked right off the car while it was in motion.\nWilliamson, Burroughs & Ryder, for appellant.\nGeers & Geers, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0420-01",
  "first_page_order": 440,
  "last_page_order": 441
}