{
  "id": 2922146,
  "name": "Anton Palmieri, Appellee, v. Illinois Third Vein Coal Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Palmieri v. Illinois Third Vein Coal Co.",
  "decision_date": "1917-08-07",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 6,433",
  "first_page": "405",
  "last_page": "406",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "208 Ill. App. 405"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 149,
    "char_count": 1866,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.548,
    "sha256": "4d6b6ef989debe36f27218d19ec412a622c60f0a75c2d4c3d2c0b5edf8f9c16f",
    "simhash": "1:9b75e647882fa645",
    "word_count": 297
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:40:32.195438+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Anton Palmieri, Appellee, v. Illinois Third Vein Coal Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Carnes\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Carnes"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "McDougall, Chapman & Bayne, for appellant; Mastin & Sherlock, of counsel.",
      "J. L. Spaulding and J. L. Murphy, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Anton Palmieri, Appellee, v. Illinois Third Vein Coal Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 6,433.\n(Not to he reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Bureau county; the Hon. Joe A. Davis, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1917.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed August 7, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Anton Palmieri, plaintiff, against Illinois Third Vein Coal Company, defendant, to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff while in defendant\u2019s employ. From a judgment for plaintiff for $1,000, defendant appeals.\nMcDougall, Chapman & Bayne, for appellant; Mastin & Sherlock, of counsel.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Workmen\u2019s Compensation Act, \u00a7 3 \u2014when employer presumed to be operating under act. An employer engaged in extra-hazardous employments as defined by the Workmen\u2019s Compensation Act is presumed to be operating under the act.\n2. Workmen\u2019s Compensation Act, \u00a7 12*\u2014what is necessary for statement of good cause of action at common law. To state and make a good cause of action by an employee against his employer for personal injuries, it must appear that the defendant has rejected the provisions of the Workmen\u2019s Compensation Act in the manner prescribed therein and was guilty of some infraction of law occasioning the injury complained of.\n3. Workmen\u2019s Compensation Act, \u00a7 12*\u2014when burden on plaintiff to show rejection by employer of provisions of. The burden is on the plaintiff, in an action at common law by an employee against his employer for personal injuries, to establish his allegation that the defendant had rejected the provisions of the Workmen\u2019s Compensation Act.\nJ. L. Spaulding and J. L. Murphy, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0405-01",
  "first_page_order": 429,
  "last_page_order": 430
}