{
  "id": 2915462,
  "name": "Chai Nashelman, Appellee, v. Grand Lodge Progressive Order of the West, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Nashelman v. Grand Lodge Progressive Order of West",
  "decision_date": "1918-03-12",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 23,188",
  "first_page": "636",
  "last_page": "637",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "209 Ill. App. 636"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 143,
    "char_count": 1782,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.561,
    "sha256": "909382073d93dbb1083e2c6e7b5d46e35051042cf1edfb41465370d9bbb95113",
    "simhash": "1:4d5c8325501520f5",
    "word_count": 296
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:09:41.322311+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Chai Nashelman, Appellee, v. Grand Lodge Progressive Order of the West, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Matchett\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n3. Tbial, \u00a7 45 \u2014when remarks of court prejudicial. In an action to recover under an accident policy, remarks of the court in ruling upon the testimony held prejudicial to defendant.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Matchett"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "G. J. Norden and Samuel Micon, for appellant.",
      "Max M. Kobshak and George L. Reker, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Chai Nashelman, Appellee, v. Grand Lodge Progressive Order of the West, Appellant.\nGen. No. 23,188. (Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Insubance, \u00a7 434 \u2014what proof necessary to permit recovery for loss of hand. In an action to recover under an accident insurance policy for the loss of a hand through sustaining a fracture in falling, plaintiff, to recover, must show that the injury resulted* in a total loss of the usual functions of the hand.\n2. Evidence, \u00a7 410*\u2014when expert evidence admissible to show nature and extent of fracture of hand. In an action to recover under an accident insurance policy for the loss of a hand through sustaining a \u201cColle\u2019s fracture\u201d thereof, defendant may introduce expert evidence to*show the nature of such a fracture and the effect of it.\nAppeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. \"WIixiam N. Gemmill, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch, Appellate Court at the March term, 1917.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed March 12, 1918.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Chai Nashelman, plaintiff, against Grand Lodge Progressive Order of the West, a corporation, defendant, to recover on an accident insurance policy. From a judgment for plaintiff for $500, defendant appeals.\nG. J. Norden and Samuel Micon, for appellant.\nMax M. Kobshak and George L. Reker, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0636-01",
  "first_page_order": 664,
  "last_page_order": 665
}