{
  "id": 5084462,
  "name": "Delta Electric Company v. William Whitcamp",
  "name_abbreviation": "Delta Electric Co. v. Whitcamp",
  "decision_date": "1895-03-23",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "141",
  "last_page": "141",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "58 Ill. App. 141"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "49 Ill. App. 232",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        5128462
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/49/0232-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "142 Ill. 578",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        3087846
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/142/0578-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "71 Ill. 640",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5311794
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/71/0640-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 143,
    "char_count": 1613,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.533,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.6082995699044088e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6851310636257172
    },
    "sha256": "25eb7294a6d14922fb678cae8cf5cb7e089e032a3c134f546766e61f6ef050b0",
    "simhash": "1:6a08ffa83429b2ac",
    "word_count": 284
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:52:30.003237+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Delta Electric Company v. William Whitcamp."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Sample\ndelivered the opinion oe the Court.\nThe appellee has filed no brief and therefore this cause might be reversed under rule 31 of this court. We have examined the record and find the facts to be, the mule of appellee, which was injured in the collision, was trespassing on appellant\u2019s track. Under this state of facts, the law is the defendant was not liable for the injury unless, first, the act was willful or wanton, or second, that after the animal was discovered to be on the track, the servants of the defendant were negligent. T. P. & W. Ry. Co. v. Barlow, 71 Ill. 640; I. C. R. R. Co. v. Noble, 142 Ill. 578; I. C. R. R. Co. v. Beard, 49 Ill. App. 232. The evidence does not justify a finding against appellant under this view of the law. The judgment is therefore reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Sample"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Lansden & Leek, attorneys for appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Delta Electric Company v. William Whitcamp.\n1. Briefs\u2014Failure to File.\u2014The Appellate Court has power to reverse a cause for a failure on the part of the appellee to file briefs as required by the rules of the court.\n2. Railroad Companies\u2014Liability for Injuries to Animals Trespassing.\u2014A railroad company is not liable for injuries to animals trespassing upon its track, unless the act from which the injury resulted was willful or wanton, or, after the animal was discovered on the track, the servants of the company were negligent.\nTrespass on the Case, for injuries to domestic animals. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Alexander County; the Hon. Alonzo K. Vickers, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the August term, 1894.\nReversed.\nOpinion filed March 23, 1895.\nLansden & Leek, attorneys for appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0141-01",
  "first_page_order": 137,
  "last_page_order": 137
}