{
  "id": 5399993,
  "name": "Sarah A. Cheatham, Appellee, v. East St. Louis Railway Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Cheatham v. East St. Louis Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1917-04-13",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "237",
  "last_page": "238",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "206 Ill. App. 237"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 177,
    "char_count": 2270,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.56,
    "sha256": "321450a8248ab21cd78a640b199a072aa9ac2d5b35dfde970cf0b9c15b8f30b1",
    "simhash": "1:4b76e75e7e9f4e10",
    "word_count": 372
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:33:48.967362+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Sarah A. Cheatham, Appellee, v. East St. Louis Railway Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Boggs\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Boggs"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Barthel, Farmer & Klingel, for appellant.",
      "D. J. Sullivan, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Sarah A. Cheatham, Appellee, v. East St. Louis Railway Company, Appellant.\n(Not to he reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of St. Clair county; the Hon. W. M. Vanbeventeb, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed April 13, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Sarah A. Cheatham, plaintiff, against the East St. Louis Railway Company, defendant, to recover damages for personal injuries sustained while plaintiff was about to enter defendant\u2019s street car. From a judgment for plaintiff for $1,500, defendant appeals.\nBarthel, Farmer & Klingel, for appellant.\nD. J. Sullivan, for appellee.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Appeal and error, \u00a7 1411 \u2014when verdict on conflicting evidence not disturbed. The evidence being conflicting, a verdict will not be disturbed unless manifestly against the weight of the evidence.\n2. Carriers, \u00a7 479*\u2014when evidence sufficient to sustain verdict for plaintiff in action for personal injuries. In an action by a street car passenger to recover damages for personal injuries sustained while about to enter defendant\u2019s car, a verdict for plaintiff held not against the manifest weight of the evidence, the evidence being conflicting.\n3. Damages, \u00a7 110*\u2014when verdict for personal injuries is not excessive. Where plaintiff by reason of the injury complained of was confined in a hospital for four weeks and was incapacitated thereafter from walking or doing any work except such as might be done sitting in a \u00bfhair, or to conduct a lunch counter which she had conducted before the injury, a verdict of $1,500 held not excessive.\n4. Damages, \u00a7 191*\u2014province of jury to determine amount. It is for the jury to say, in an action for damages for personal injuries, under the evidence the amount the injured person is entitled to recover.\n5. Damages, \u00a7 241*\u2014when verdict of jury not disturbed. Unless the evidence shows that the jury in finding the amount of damages for injuries sustained were governed by prejudice or passion in fixing such amount, their finding should not be disturbed for the reason alone that it is excessive.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0237-01",
  "first_page_order": 281,
  "last_page_order": 282
}