{
  "id": 2872415,
  "name": "John F. Devine, Administrator, Appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Devine v. Chicago City Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1915-11-01",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 20,868",
  "first_page": "304",
  "last_page": "306",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "195 Ill. App. 304"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 316,
    "char_count": 4739,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.555,
    "sha256": "ab7c66559a8f4096dc76e142c8300ce034d244ba88d2b5cf92c50e68b1170338",
    "simhash": "1:fa3bf0b7542893f5",
    "word_count": 818
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:42:01.145099+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "John F. Devine, Administrator, Appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Holdom\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n4. Evidence, \u00a7 387 \u2014when expert\u2019s opinion as to cause of death admissible. In an action against a street railroad company to recover for the death of a person alleged to have been caused by the starting of defendant\u2019s car while he was in the act of boarding it, where it is not disputed that the immediate cause of death was edema of the lungs, it is competent for an expert medical witness to give his opinion as to the cause of the edema.\n5. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1474 \u2014when admission of evidence not ground for reversal. The admission of opinion evidence is not ground for reversal even though the objection thereto is well founded, where evidence of a like character was introduced by both parties.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Holdom"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "James G. Condon and Watson J. Ferry, for appellant; W. W. Gurley and J. R. Guilliams, of counsel.",
      "James C. McShane, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "John F. Devine, Administrator, Appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 20,868.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Richard E. Burke, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the October term, 1914.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed November 1, 1915.\nCertiorari denied by Supreme Court (making opinion final).\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by John F. Devine, administrator of the estate of David Kaufman, plaintiff, against Chicago City Railway Company, defendant, to recover damages of defendant for negligently causing the death of plaintiff\u2019s intestate. From a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $3,000, defendant appeals.\nPlaintiff contends that defendant\u2019s car, while at' a standstill and taking on passengers, suddenly and without warning started while deceased was in the act of boarding it, with one foot on the running board, causing him to be thrown to the ground, inflicting injuries from which he shortly thereafter died.\nThe deceased was with his wife and other friends, all of whom were boarding the car, and all but deceased succeeded in so doing without accident. All these persons, including the deceased, were in clear view of the conductor and their purpose of boarding the car while it was stationary was apparent.\nThe plaintiff\u2019s intestate, at the time of suffering the injuries which it is claimed resulted in his death, was seventy-one years of age. An autopsy disclosed that at the time of his death certain of his internal organs were diseased, including his heart, kidneys and stomach.\nThere is no evidence that deceased was consciously suffering from any fatal malady on the day of his death or that he had complained of any particular physical distress. At the time of the accident he was going about his usual affairs and was on his way to visit at the house of a friend. His widow testifies that he had not been recently treated by a medical man and had not taken to his bed on account of sickness for more than five years prior to his death. These facts appear from her testimony: \u201cBefore this accident my husband looked well and seemed perfectly well. * * * I do not know of my husband being under the doctor\u2019s care before this accident for anything except \u2014I guess it is ten or fifteen years ago. * * * Before this accident he was not in bed, I am sure not in five years, for any cause. \u2019 \u2019\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Carriers, \u00a7 476 \u2014when evidence sufficient to support verdict finding negligence in starting car. In an action against a street railroad company to recover for the death of plaintiff\u2019s intestate alleged, to have, been caused' by the negligence of defendant\u2019s servant in starting the car before the intestate had a reasonable opportunity to board it, the evidence examined and held to support a finding that defendant was negligent.\n2. Carriers, \u00a7 367 \u2014what duty owed to persons hoarding car. Where persons intending to board a street car are in clear view of the conductor and their purpose of boarding the car while it is stationary is apparent, it is the duty of the conductor not to start the car until all of them are safely on and to give them sufficient time to board it.\n3. Carriers, \u00a7 476 \u2014when evidence sufficient to show that negligence was proximate cause of death. In an action against a street railroad company to recover for the death of a person alleged to have been caused by defendant\u2019s negligence in starting its car as deceased was attempting to board it, the evidence examined and held sufficient to support a finding that the injury resulted by the starting of the car was the proximate cause of his death and that the death was not due to diseases with which he was afflicted at the time the injury was received.\nJames G. Condon and Watson J. Ferry, for appellant; W. W. Gurley and J. R. Guilliams, of counsel.\nJames C. McShane, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0304-01",
  "first_page_order": 330,
  "last_page_order": 332
}