{
  "id": 2966559,
  "name": "Thornton Akers, Appellee, v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Akers v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1915-10-13",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "14",
  "last_page": "15",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "201 Ill. App. 14"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 179,
    "char_count": 2308,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.555,
    "sha256": "94e590679d7ca990ecd721ae9e62a4512f9f6a59d760382c16ed64ae8e471789",
    "simhash": "1:af6ee0b5908d7201",
    "word_count": 375
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:52:04.845486+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Thornton Akers, Appellee, v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Graves\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Graves"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "George B. Gillespie, for appellant; L. J. Hackney and F. L. Littleton, of counsel.",
      "Edward C. Craig, Donald B. Craig and James W. Craig, Jr., for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Thornton Akers, Appellee, v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Company, Appellant.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Coles county; the Hon. M. W. Thompson, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1914.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed October 13, 1915.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Thornton Akers, plaintiff, against Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Company, defendant, to recover damages for breach of a contract to furnish within a certain time a car of specified dimensions in which to load an interstate shipment of hogs. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.\nGeorge B. Gillespie, for appellant; L. J. Hackney and F. L. Littleton, of counsel.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1411 \u2014when verdict not set aside as unsupported by evidence. A verdict on conflicting evidence will not be set aside on appeal as unsupported by the evidence unless manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence.\n2. Instructions, \u00a7 115*\u2014when requested instruction properly refused as inapplicable to issues. In an action by a shipper against a carrier to recover damages for breach of a contract to furnish within a certain time a car of specified dimensions in which to load an interstate shipment of hogs, a requested instruction framed on the theory that the issue being tried was whether defendant exercised due diligence to furnish the car ordered within a reasonable time, held properly refused as inapplicable to the issues.\n3. New trial\u2014when party estopped to complain of admission of incompetent evidence. A party who is participating in a trial, and who calmly sits by and hears incompetent evidence introduced without interposing any objection thereto, cannot on a motion for new trial be heard to complain that it was admitted.\n4. Appeal and error, \u00a7 450*\u2014when objection to admissibility of evidence not considered on appeal. A party who participated in a trial and heard incompetent evidence without objection is estopped to complain on appeal of the admission of such evidence.\nEdward C. Craig, Donald B. Craig and James W. Craig, Jr., for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0014-01",
  "first_page_order": 56,
  "last_page_order": 57
}