{
  "id": 5063431,
  "name": "William H. Bean v. Anthony Elton",
  "name_abbreviation": "Bean v. Elton",
  "decision_date": "1892-06-01",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "442",
  "last_page": "443",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "44 Ill. App. 442"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "120 Ill. 403",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5384940
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/120/0403-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "15 Ill. 200",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        436563
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/15/0200-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "63 Ill. 243",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2613033
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/63/0243-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 151,
    "char_count": 1598,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.483,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.210515993381059e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3845181707504955
    },
    "sha256": "12d8e75ebe49bc73da7a6e6a0171887ad0db75a27179c19f2488375c465d65dc",
    "simhash": "1:09fe0b6436aab830",
    "word_count": 270
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:00:30.730018+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "William H. Bean v. Anthony Elton."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Waterman, P. J.\nAppellee brought suit to recover the stipulated compensation he would have received for some six months\u2019 services, had he not, as he insisted, been wrongfully discharged.\nThe declaration contains only the common counts. The action being not for work and labor performed, but for damages resulting from a breach of a special contract, no recovery could be had under the common counts. 1 Chitty\u2019s Pleadings, 359, 360; Hulle v. Heightman, 2 East, 401; Trustees v. Shaffer, 63 Ill. 243.\nThe defendant asked to have the jury instructed that the plaintiff must prove his case by a preponderance of the evidence; this the court refused to do. Under the issues formed, the burden being upon the plaintiff, he was required to make out his case by a preponderance of the evidence, and this instruction should have been given. Watt v. Kirby, 15 Ill. 200; Schroeder v. Walsh, 120 Ill. 403.\nThe judgment of the Circuit Court will be reversed and the cause remanded.\nReversed and remanded.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Waterman, P. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. F. M. Williams, for appellant.",
      "Ho appearance for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "William H. Bean v. Anthony Elton.\nMaster and Servant\u2014Recovery of Wages\u2014Wrongful Discharge.\n1. No recovery can be had under the common counts, the declaration containing no others, in an action for damages resulting from the breach of a special contract of service.\n2. It was error, in the case presented, to refuse an instruction asserting that the plaintiff was required to make out a case by a preponderanee of the evidence.\n[Opinion filed June 1, 1892.]\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Frank Baker, Judge, presiding.\nMr. F. M. Williams, for appellant.\nHo appearance for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0442-01",
  "first_page_order": 438,
  "last_page_order": 439
}