{
  "id": 2921734,
  "name": "Benjamin J. Hedger, Appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Hedger v. Chicago City Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1917-06-11",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,928",
  "first_page": "26",
  "last_page": "27",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "207 Ill. App. 26"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 206,
    "char_count": 2759,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.55,
    "sha256": "b1d00a18d1ea5c948e91812f2a9516c30be8765e283e699401c60370b55fc6a4",
    "simhash": "1:7a63cae51c2f047c",
    "word_count": 459
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:52:34.192092+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Benjamin J. Hedger, Appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Holdom\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Holdom"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Watson J. Ferry, for appellant; W. W. Gurley, J. R. Guilliams and T. J. Symhes, of counsel.",
      "Vincent G. Gallagher and Ernest Messner, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Benjamin J. Hedger, Appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 22,928.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. David F. Hatchett, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916. Reversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed June 11, 1917.\nRehearing denied June 25, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Benjamin J. Hedger, plaintiff, against the Chicago City Railway Company, a corporation, and Chicago Railways Company, defendants, to recover for personal injuries. The cause was discontinued as to the latter defendant and a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $2,250 was had against the Chicago City Railway Company, from which it appeals.\nWatson J. Ferry, for appellant; W. W. Gurley, J. R. Guilliams and T. J. Symhes, of counsel.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Instructions, \u00a7 95 \u2014 what is proper instruction on credibility of plaintiff as witness. In an action for personal injuries, an instruction is vicious which tells the jury that they shall treat plaintiff's evidence in the same way as that of any other witness and subject his testimony to the same tests only as are applicable to other witnesses, the proper instruction being that the jury have the right, in weighing plaintiff\u2019s evidence, to determine how much credence should be given to it, and, in so doing, take into consideration that he is the plaintiff and interested in the result of the suit.\n2. Carriers, \u00a7 485* \u2014 when instruction in action by passenger for assault is erroneous as not conforming to pleading. In an action by a passenger for injuries alleged to have been caused by an assault by defendant\u2019s conductor, the declaration in which does not aver any assault by the conductor after he and plaintiff were off the car, it is not proper to instruct that defendant was liable for an assault by the conductor after he had ejected plaintiff and that it would be liable for injuries sustained by an assault by the conductor after plaintiff was off the car.\n3. Carriers, \u00a7 344* \u2014 when carrier is not liable for injuries caused by conductor. A carrier is not liable for injuries to a passenger sustained by reason of a personal difficulty of a passenger with its conductor committed after he and the conductor were off its car.\n4. Assault and battery, \u00a7 17* \u2014 when instruction is erroneous as not conforming to declaration. Where the declaration in an action for personal injuries charges an assault, an instruction grounded upon negligence, which is not charged in the declaration, is improper.\nVincent G. Gallagher and Ernest Messner, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0026-01",
  "first_page_order": 52,
  "last_page_order": 53
}