{
  "id": 2921914,
  "name": "John F. Devine, Administrator, Appellant, v. C. A. Carlson, Appellee",
  "name_abbreviation": "Devine v. Carlson",
  "decision_date": "1917-10-10",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 22,373",
  "first_page": "415",
  "last_page": "416",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "207 Ill. App. 415"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 186,
    "char_count": 2348,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.556,
    "sha256": "9e1d28b87d8d7d433466914dda8a5d01b924a7a6541c77acc35a04b9cc53ebe3",
    "simhash": "1:4326dbf275a803f0",
    "word_count": 389
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:52:34.192092+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "John F. Devine, Administrator, Appellant, v. C. A. Carlson, Appellee."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Goodwin\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Goodwin"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Haight, Brows & Haight, for appellant.",
      "Boss C. Hall and Oscar H. Olsen, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "John F. Devine, Administrator, Appellant, v. C. A. Carlson, Appellee.\nGen. No. 22,373.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. M. L. McKinley, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1916.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed October 10, 1917.\nRehearing denied October 25, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by John F. Devine, administrator of the estate of John A. Benson, deceased, plaintiff, against O. A. Carlson, defendant, to recover for the death of plaintiff\u2019s intestate, alleged to have been due to the negligence of defendant, intestate\u2019s employer, in carelessly constructing and permitting certain heavy timbers resting on crosspieces, nailed to certain uprights in a barn, to be so insecurely nailed as to allow the load of lumber resting upon them to be insecurely supported and dangerous and to fall upon intestate. From a judgment in favor of defendant on a directed verdict, plaintiff appeals.\nHaight, Brows & Haight, for appellant.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Negligence, \u00a7 171 \u2014 when evidence as to conditions surrounding glace of accident is admissible. Evidence as to the conditions surrounding the place of an accident shortly after it occurs is admissible.\n2. Appeal and ebbob, \u00a7 450* \u2014 when objection to evidence may not be raised. An objection that a question is improper because calling for the conclusion of the witness is improper unless made in the trial court.\n3. Death, \u00a7 44* \u2014 when exclusion of evidence as to whether witness saw fallen\u25a0 lumber after accident is error. In an action for the death of an employee alleged to he due to the negligence of the employer in carelessly constructing and knowingly permitting certain heavy timbers resting on crosspieces, nailed to certain uprights in a barn, to be so insecurely nailed as to.allow the load of lumber resting upon them to be dangerous so that they fell upon intestate, where the condition of the premises was one of the vital facts in the case, held that the exclusion of evidence of a witness, as to whether he saw any lumber that had fallen, was reversible error.\nBoss C. Hall and Oscar H. Olsen, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0415-01",
  "first_page_order": 441,
  "last_page_order": 442
}