{
  "id": 5407390,
  "name": "Josef Harovsky, Appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company and United States Express Company, on appeal of Chicago City Railway Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Harovsky v. Chicago City Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1917-05-28",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,850",
  "first_page": "570",
  "last_page": "571",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "205 Ill. App. 570"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 178,
    "char_count": 2278,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.57,
    "sha256": "64843b26c2a71dfd9020f4880a54abae32a7cc765f66bcb4c49acd190e4c9621",
    "simhash": "1:8203bf215403d63c",
    "word_count": 372
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:46:37.056812+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Josef Harovsky, Appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company and United States Express Company, on appeal of Chicago City Railway Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Street railroads, \u00a7 131*\u2014When evidence sufficient to show negligence in causing express wagon to strike pedestrian. In an action against a street railway company and an express company to recover for injuries to plaintiff, received while walking on a sidewalk, through a collision between a street car and an express wagon which caused the wagon to strike plaintiff, evidence examined and held sufficient to support a finding that the street railway company was guilty of negligence.\n2. Street railroads, \u00a7 149 \u2014when refusal of requested instruction in action for injuries to pedestrian is proper. In an action against a street railway company and an express company to recover for injuries to plaintiff who, while walking on the sidewalk, was struck by an express wagon which had collided with a street car, it is not error to refuse an instruction which is predicated upon a situation in which a plaintiff finds himself suddenly placed in a position of danger and which undertakes to state a defendant\u2019s duty in such a situation.\n3. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1565*\u2014when modification of requested instruction not reversible error. It is not reversible error for the court to make an addition to a requested instruction which renders it less apt to mislead the jury.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Watson J. Ferry, for appellant; W. W. Gurley, J. R. Guilliams and B. F. Richolson, of counsel.",
      "David K. Tone and F. A. Rockhold, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Josef Harovsky, Appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company and United States Express Company, on appeal of Chicago City Railway Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 22,850.\n(Not to he reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Oscar E. Heard, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed May 28, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction for personal injuries by Josef Harovsky, plaintiff, against Chicago City Railway Company and United States Express Company, defendants. From a verdict and judgment against both defendants for $2,000, defendants appeal separately. For appeal by other defendant, see post, p. 571.\nWatson J. Ferry, for appellant; W. W. Gurley, J. R. Guilliams and B. F. Richolson, of counsel.\nDavid K. Tone and F. A. Rockhold, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0570-01",
  "first_page_order": 598,
  "last_page_order": 599
}