{
  "id": 5824352,
  "name": "Maud Wentworth, Appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Wentworth v. Chicago City Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1918-03-13",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 23,315",
  "first_page": "116",
  "last_page": "117",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "210 Ill. App. 116"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 191,
    "char_count": 2619,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.535,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.207966869300525e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3281289758592103
    },
    "sha256": "5bd6e58f46671a7aafbde31053dfb5af16e8cac002a8af68bfb39684d31003d1",
    "simhash": "1:8d0ecad41208e1a9",
    "word_count": 424
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:15:15.348169+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Maud Wentworth, Appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mb. Justice Thomson\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n2. Evidence, \u00a7 475 \u2014when preponderance of is with defendant. The preponderance of the evidence held to be clearly against the plaintiff and in favor of the defendant, where plaintiff was the only witness in her behalf and her testimony was unconvincing and uncorroborated, and the testimony on behalf of the defendant was clear and convincing and uncoritradictory.\n3. Damages, \u00a7 240*\u2014when verdict is based upon sympathy of jury. Where plaintiff alleged damages for injuries, claimed to have been caused by defendant\u2019s negligence, at $5,000, and the injuries were severe and painful and such as to entitle her to substantial damages, and plaintiff was a woman 50 years of age, practically alone in the world, and dependent upon herself for a living, and the \u2022 preponderance of the evidence was clearly against her and in favor of defendant, held that a verdict of $500 indicated that the jury were moved to find in her favor and give such damages because of sympathy for her.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mb. Justice Thomson"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "William H. Stmmes and Frank L. Kriete, for appellant; J. R. Guilliams and Warner H. Robinson, of counsel.",
      "William Gillespie, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Maud Wentworth, Appellee, v. Chicago City Railway Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 23,315.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\nL Appeal and ebbob, \u00a7 1411 \u2014when verdict based on conflicting evidence not disturbed. Where the evidence is conflicting and that of the plaintiff when taken alone is sufficient to support the verdict, the verdict will not be set aside and the judgment reversed although the testimony of the plaintiff may be the only evidence supporting the verdict, and there may be the testimony of several witnesses contradicting that of the plaintiff, except where a careful examination of the record leads to the conclusion that the verdict and judgment are clearly against the manifest weight of the evidence.\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Theodore Beentano, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1917.\nReversed with finding of facts.\nOpinion filed March 13, 1918.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Maud Wentworth, plaintiff, against Chicago City Railway Company, defendant, to recover damages for personal injuries sustained while plaintiff was attempting to board one of defendant\u2019s street cars. From a judgment for plaintiff for $500, defendant appeals.\nWilliam H. Stmmes and Frank L. Kriete, for appellant; J. R. Guilliams and Warner H. Robinson, of counsel.\nWilliam Gillespie, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vole. 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": "0116-01",
  "first_page_order": 142,
  "last_page_order": 143
}