{
  "id": 5019164,
  "name": "Gertrude Dorgan, Appellant, v. Hubert Graeber, Appellee",
  "name_abbreviation": "Dorgan v. Graeber",
  "decision_date": "1948-11-10",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 44,340",
  "first_page": "503",
  "last_page": "504",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "335 Ill. App. 503"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "315 Ill. App. 229",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5647906
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/315/0229-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "265 Ill. App. 358",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        3332141
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/265/0358-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "41 Ill. App. 144",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5030167
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/41/0144-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "335 Ill. App. 124",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5020516,
        5021732
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/335/0124-02",
        "/ill-app/335/0124-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "286 Ill. App. 219",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5617479
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/286/0219-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "396 Ill. 371",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2466172
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/396/0371-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 181,
    "char_count": 2085,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.516,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.903706046084735e-08,
      "percentile": 0.5355939670614001
    },
    "sha256": "00fc0b0e19413a8d42a3ef9b781f942423c4f85de10476d0a714af7653993993",
    "simhash": "1:6df3efa4dcce9f5f",
    "word_count": 341
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:12:17.096206+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Gertrude Dorgan, Appellant, v. Hubert Graeber, Appellee."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Burke\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nGertrude Dorgan filed a complaint in the circuit court of Cook county against Hubert Graeber, alleging that she suffered personal injuries as a direct result of the negligent operation of an automobile by defendant. A trial resulted in a verdict of \u201cnot guilty.\u201d Plaintiff\u2019s motion for a new trial was overruled and judgment was entered on the verdict. Plaintiff appeals.\nThe parties agree that the case presented factual issues to be determined by the jury. Plaintiff asks reversal on the sole ground of error in the giving of instructions. The record and supplemental record do not show by whom the instructions were tendered. In City of Chicago v. Callender, 396 Ill. 371, in a similar factual situation, the court said (382): \u201cIn this state of the record objections to the instructions obviously cannot be considered.\u201d In Janelunas v. Chicago Fraternal Life Ass\u2019n, 286 Ill. App. 219, the court, observing that the record did not show at whose instance the instructions were submitted, said (224) : \u201cNo question based on the instructions is saved.\u201d In Gidlof v. Grosser, 335 Ill. App. 124 (abst.) we said:\n\u201cNo authority or citation is offered by Gidlof as a basis for our considering his objections, to the instructions. We consider it a dangerous practice to infer from a reading\u2019 of an instruction without more, that one party or the other offered it. Neufield v. Rodiminski, 41 Ill. App. 144: We shall not consider the points raised on the instructions. Price v. Bailey, 265 Ill. App. 358.\u201d See also Horvat v. Opas, 315 Ill. App. 229.\nIn the state of the record objections to the instructions cannot be considered. The judgment of the circuit court of Cook county is affirmed.'\nJudgment affirmed.\nKiley and Lews, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Burke"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Robert Irmiger, of Chicago, for appellant; Robert E. Cusacic, of Chicago, of counsel.",
      "Ross, Berchem & Schwantes, of Chicago, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Gertrude Dorgan, Appellant, v. Hubert Graeber, Appellee.\nGen. No. 44,340.\nOpinion filed November 10, 1948.\nReleased for publication December 2, 1948.\nRobert Irmiger, of Chicago, for appellant; Robert E. Cusacic, of Chicago, of counsel.\nRoss, Berchem & Schwantes, of Chicago, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0503-01",
  "first_page_order": 543,
  "last_page_order": 544
}