{
  "id": 3015252,
  "name": "Peter Hackethal, Appellee, v. East Side Levee & Sanitary District, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Hackethal v. East Side Levee & Sanitary District",
  "decision_date": "1918-04-05",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "119",
  "last_page": "120",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "211 Ill. App. 119"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "203 Ill. App. 48",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5409449
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/203/0048-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "194 Ill. App. 262",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        2876314
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/194/0262-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 193,
    "char_count": 2443,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.545,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.08701144352431359
    },
    "sha256": "c7d50af16bdf7e30e12b514ac7e62746486b148a2d67cbaead6146f8354a3251",
    "simhash": "1:1d3553bfb809f695",
    "word_count": 392
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:44:38.810297+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Peter Hackethal, Appellee, v. East Side Levee & Sanitary District, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice McBride\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\n2. Torts, \u00a7 23 \u2014 when wrongdoers liable only for amount contributed to damage sustained. If the wrong complained of consists of two independent acts and performed by two independent parties, at different times, each party will be liable only for the amount it contributed to the damage sustained.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice McBride"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "F. A. Garesche, J. B. Harris and D. H. Mudge, for appellant; Thomas E. Gillespie, of counsel.",
      "Burton & Burton, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Peter Hackethal, Appellee, v. East Side Levee & Sanitary District, Appellant.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Sanitary districts, \u00a7 17a \u2014 When instruction on liability for loss of crops due to flooding because of levee embankment is erroneous. In an action by a landowner against a levee and sanitary district to recover damages for injury to crops by overflow, caused by a levee constructed by defendant and by a railroad embankment, an instruction that even if the jury found from the evidence that the railroad embankment combined with defendant\u2019s levee caused the damage to plaintiff\u2019s crops by holding the water upon the lands of plaintiff, still this would not relieve defendant from liability, and as to such damages, if any, they should find for plaintiff, was erroneous where the respective embankments were constructed by the sanitary district and railroad individually at different times, and neither had anything to do with the construction of the other\u2019s embankment.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Madison county; the Hon. Louis Bernbeuteb, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1917.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed April 5, 1918.\nRehearing denied June 22, 1918.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Peter Hackethal, plaintiff, against East Side Levee & Sanitary District, defendant, to recover damages for injury to crops by overflow caused by an embankment of a canal constructed by defendant and also by a railroad embankment. From a judgment for plaintiff for $700, defendant appeals.\nSee also the cases of Handfelder v. East Side Levee & Sanitary Dist., 194 Ill. App. 262, and Hoehn v. East Side Levee & Sanitary Dist., 203 Ill. App. 48, in which the principal questions involved were determined.\nF. A. Garesche, J. B. Harris and D. H. Mudge, for appellant; Thomas E. Gillespie, of counsel.\nBurton & Burton, 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": "0119-01",
  "first_page_order": 173,
  "last_page_order": 174
}