{
  "id": 2974124,
  "name": "Joseph Maslo by Stanislaw Maslo, Defendant in Error, v. Franciszka Matyasik, Plaintiff in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Maslo v. Matyasik",
  "decision_date": "1916-05-29",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,279",
  "first_page": "482",
  "last_page": "484",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "199 Ill. App. 482"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 209,
    "char_count": 2963,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.545,
    "sha256": "9fc5a6e91ef86130b1ce26c8063db7dac41d5672477ded793a8c9912b9a5f19c",
    "simhash": "1:d0017a9d301ccafd",
    "word_count": 493
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:51:30.955611+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Joseph Maslo by Stanislaw Maslo, Defendant in Error, v. Franciszka Matyasik, Plaintiff in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Joseph E. Burees and Maximilian J. St. George, for plaintiff in error.",
      "No appearance for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Joseph Maslo by Stanislaw Maslo, Defendant in Error, v. Franciszka Matyasik, Plaintiff in Error.\nGen. No. 22,279.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. John A. Ma-honey, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed May 29, 1916.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Joseph Maslo, by Stanislaw Maslo, his next friend, plaintiff, against Franciszka Matyasik, defendant, for damages for personal injuries to the plaintiff, alleged to have resulted from his being struck by a brick thrown by the defendant. To reverse a judgment for plaintiff for four hundred dollars, defendant prosecutes a writ of error.\nThe plaintiff, a boy six years of age, was struck on the head by a brick alleged to have been thrown by the defendant. A witness testified positively that he saw the defendant throw the brick striking the child, and there was evidence tending to corroborate his story, including the testimony of one witness as to an admission by the defendant. Defendant testified denying that she threw the missile, and was supported by the testimony of a son, who stated that when other boys were throwing bricks at him he threw the brick and by mistake struck plaintiff.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Assault and battery, \u00a7 14 \u2014when evidence sufficient to sustain verdict. In an action for damages for personal injuries caused by a brick alleged to have been thrown at the plaintiff by the defendant, evidence held sufficient to sustain a verdict for the plaintiff.\n2. Witnesses, \u00a7 298*\u2014when question touching general reputation ,of witness improper in form. Question, touching the general reputation of a witness, as to \"whether he will tell the truth or not,\u201d held improper in form.\n3. Witnesses, \u00a7 278*\u2014when questions put to witness for purposes of impeachment improper. Questions tending to develop that a witness had made statements contrary to his testimony on the stand are improper where such witness is not given an opportunity to affirm or deny making of such statements.\n4. Assault and battery, \u00a7 22*\u2014when verdict for injuries to child, not excessive. Verdict for four hundred dollars awarded a six-year-old boy for injuries sustained by being struck by a brick thrown by the defendant, held not excessive where the plaintiff suffered a cut on the head one inch in length which required stitches, and a condition of shock with resulting impairment of the nervous system.\nThe physicians testified as to the infliction of a cut on the head about an inch in length which required stitches. There was other evidence tending to show a condition of shock, with resulting impairment of the child\u2019s nervous system.\nJoseph E. Burees and Maximilian J. St. George, for plaintiff in error.\nNo appearance for defendant in error.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0482-01",
  "first_page_order": 504,
  "last_page_order": 506
}