{
  "id": 2961245,
  "name": "Charles Zenisek, Appellee, v. Chicago Consolidated Bottling Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Zenisek v. Chicago Consolidated Bottling Co.",
  "decision_date": "1916-10-30",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,330",
  "first_page": "559",
  "last_page": "559",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "201 Ill. App. 559"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 129,
    "char_count": 1680,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.566,
    "sha256": "395cb6e034f0c01a86883abb92011dd4969e5be4263f15e2518af068934243a5",
    "simhash": "1:50188bd7a425a074",
    "word_count": 270
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:52:04.845486+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Charles Zenisek, Appellee, v. Chicago Consolidated Bottling Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Daniel L. Madden and Thomas F. Burke, for appellant.",
      "Charles V. Barrett, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Charles Zenisek, Appellee, v. Chicago Consolidated Bottling Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 22,330.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1165 \u2014what questions presented for review. On appeal from a judgment for plaintiff in an action to recover for injury to his automobile as a result of a collision with defendant\u2019s motor truck, alleged to have been due to defendant\u2019s negligence, the only question presented for review, where defendant does not discuss the findings of the jury or the question of negligence, is that of the amount of the verdict.\n2. Automobiles and garages, \u00a7 3*\u2014when amount of verdict sustained by evidence. In an action to recover for injury to plaintiff\u2019s automobile in a collision with defendant\u2019s motor truck, alleged to have been due to defendant\u2019s negligence, evidence held to sustain a verdict of $425 for plaintiff.\nAppeal from the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. J. J. Cooke, judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed October 30, 1916.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Charles Zenisek, plaintiff, against the Chicago Consolidated Bottling Company, defendant, in the County Court of Cook county, to recover damages for injury to plaintiff\u2019s automobile in a collision with defendant\u2019s motor truck, alleged to have been due to defendant\u2019s negligence. From a judgment for plaintiff for $425, defendant appeals.\nDaniel L. Madden and Thomas F. Burke, for appellant.\nCharles V. Barrett, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0559-01",
  "first_page_order": 601,
  "last_page_order": 601
}