{
  "id": 5824488,
  "name": "Grace Carden, Appellee, v. Chicago Railways Company, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Carden v. Chicago Railways Co.",
  "decision_date": "1918-03-25",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 23,907",
  "first_page": "155",
  "last_page": "156",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "210 Ill. App. 155"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 210,
    "char_count": 2940,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.561,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.12982294956584e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3231754052070217
    },
    "sha256": "bc617f2155806837f8d74386ae001406357d87ac1fc699a652c5886aa165ec13",
    "simhash": "1:60d2f132440864d9",
    "word_count": 497
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:15:15.348169+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Grace Carden, Appellee, v. Chicago Railways Company, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Holdom\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n2. Street railroads, \u00a7 91 \u2014what is negligence per se on part of driver of automobile. It is negligence per se for the driver of an automobile to stop on a street car track or to go slowly over the track when an on-coming street car is close at hand.\n3. Street railroads, \u00a7 95*\u2014what constitutes negligence in crossing tracks with automobile. It is negligence for the driver of an automobile to attempt to cross a street in front of an approaching street car without looking.\n4. Street railroads, \u00a7 104*\u2014when negligence of driver of automobile not imputed to occupant. The negligence of the driver of an automobile colliding with a street car cannot be imputed to an occupant.\n5. Street railroads, \u00a7 91*\u2014when occupant of automobile colliding with street .car is guilty of contributory negligence. One who is riding in her parent\u2019s automobile, which her sister is driving, and knows that the automobile, after the passing of a street car going in the same direction on the nearer of two street car tracks, is being turned in the middle of the block, to cross the nearer track and the further track for cars going in the opposite direction, and could have seen an on-coming car on the further track if she had looked, but pays no attention whatever, is guilty of contributory negligence.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Holdom"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Joseph D. Ryan and Watson J. Ferry, for appellant; W. W. Gurley and J. R. Guilliams, of counsel.",
      "John A. Bloomingston, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Grace Carden, Appellee, v. Chicago Railways Company, Appellant.\nGen. No. 23,907.\n(Not to he reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Street railroads, \u00a7 131 \u2014when shown that driver of eleatrio automobile'is negligent in crossing street in middle of block. Evidence held sufficient to show that the driver of an electric automobile was negligent in attempting to cross, in the middle of the block, the further of two parallel street car tracks, and at a slow speed, after having waited for a street car on the nearer track, running in the direction the driver was going before the automobile was turned, to pass, and having observed a street car on the further track a short distance away going in the opposite direction.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Lockwood Honobe, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the October term, 1917.\nReversed with findings of fact.\nOpinion filed March 25, 1918.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Grace Carden, plaintiff, against Chicago Railways Company, defendant, to recover damages for personal injuries received due to a \"collision of an electric automobile, in which plaintiff was riding, with one of defendant\u2019s street cars. From a judgment for plaintiff for $2,500, defendant appeals.\nJoseph D. Ryan and Watson J. Ferry, for appellant; W. W. Gurley and J. R. Guilliams, of counsel.\nJohn A. Bloomingston, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vole. XI to XV. anti Cumulative Quarterly, gante topic and section number.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0155-01",
  "first_page_order": 181,
  "last_page_order": 182
}