{
  "id": 5406606,
  "name": "Carrie Conrad, Appellee, v. Charles A. Stevens & Brothers, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Conrad v. Charles A. Stevens & Bros.",
  "decision_date": "1917-05-09",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 21,942",
  "first_page": "494",
  "last_page": "495",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "205 Ill. App. 494"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 230,
    "char_count": 3088,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.583,
    "sha256": "d5e5ce9a27c46a6fa1a9faa1b093267a7f1051061c0ebecf06822a78e9f5de07",
    "simhash": "1:1b1d7b1d502ff0ba",
    "word_count": 496
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:46:37.056812+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Carrie Conrad, Appellee, v. Charles A. Stevens & Brothers, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Goodwin\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n3. Instructions, \u00a7 67*\u2014when not erroneous because assuming facts. It is not erroneous to assume, in an instruction, the existence of an uncontroverted fact fully disclosed by the evidence.\n4. Appeal and ebbor, \u00a7 883*\u2014necessity of abstracting instruction. Where complaint was made on appeal of the modification \u201cof another instruction,\u201d but the instruction itself was not identified or abstracted, held that the court was not constrained to search the record for it.\n5. Damages, \u00a7 115*\u2014when judgment not excessive. A judgment for $2,500 for personal injuries held not excessive.\n6. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1752 \u2014when judgment affirmed for insufficiency of abstract. Where appellant\u2019s abstract was stricken from the record as not complying with the rules, and he filed a so-called \u201cadditional abstract of record\u201d which merely attempted to supplement the former abstract and was altogether incomplete in itself or with the former, held that affirmance of the judgment was proper.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Goodwin"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "John A. Bloomingston, for appellant.",
      "Richard J. Finn, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Carrie Conrad, Appellee, v. Charles A. Stevens & Brothers, Appellant.\nGen. No. 21,942.\n(Not to he reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Master and servant, \u00a7 683 -\u2014when evidence sufficient to show failure to provide proper handrails on stairway. Evidence held sufficient to sustain the finding that defendants had failed to provide proper and substantial handrails on the stairway in defendant\u2019s building where plaintiff, an employee, sustained injuries, as required by Rev. St. ch. 48, sec. 104 (J. & A. 1\u00cd 5401), providing that proper and substantial handrails shall be provided on all stairways in factories, mercantile establishments, mills or workshops, etc.\n2. Master and servant\u2014what is not proper handrail on stairway. Where a certain handrailing at the top of a stairway in defendant\u2019s building had been cut away on the outside and the end of an upright supporting a series of shelves \"set into the part cut away for about two feet from the top of the stairway, so that it would be impossible to grasp it, although a hand or a portion of it might rest upon it, held that such was not a \u201cproper\u201d handrail within Rev. St. ch. 48, sec. 104 (J. & A. 5401), providing that proper and substantial handrails shall be provided on all stairways in factories, mercantile establishments, mills or workshops, etc.\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. M. L. McKinley, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed May 9, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Carrie Conrad, plaintiff, against Charles A. Stevens & Brothers, defendant, to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff\u2019s fall on a stairway in defendant\u2019s building. From a judgment for plaintiff for $2,500, defendant appeals.\nJohn A. Bloomingston, for appellant.\nRichard J. Finn, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vois, XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0494-01",
  "first_page_order": 522,
  "last_page_order": 523
}