{
  "id": 5238782,
  "name": "Mary Quinn v. The City of Chicago",
  "name_abbreviation": "Quinn v. City of Chicago",
  "decision_date": "1898-02-14",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "399",
  "last_page": "400",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "73 Ill. App. 399"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 152,
    "char_count": 2103,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.495,
    "sha256": "5f2bd80b37469e3ab71c6f35ab2197d015638dbeaa6cc7732e8733933d3999b3",
    "simhash": "1:554b72b15b8307bc",
    "word_count": 356
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:07:49.615974+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Mary Quinn v. The City of Chicago."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice Adams\ndelivered the opinion of the Court.\nPlaintiff in error sued defendant in error in case for negligently permitting a pile of boards, sticks of timber, iron rods, etc., to be and remain upon the sidewalk of a public street of the city of Chicago, per quod plaintiff, while exercising ordinary care, was injured, etc. The jury found the defendant not guilty, a motion for a new trial was overruled, and judgment was entered on the verdict.\nThe plaintiff assigns as error the giving of the instructions, and each of them, requested by the defendant. The only reference to evidence in the bill of ex- . ceptions is as follows:\n\u201cBe it known that upon the trial of said cause on the 19th and 20th days of May, A. D. 1897, before his Honor, Judge Philip Stein and a jury, the plaintiff introduced evidence tending to sustain the allegations of her declaration herein, and the defendant introduced evidence in conflict with that of the plaintiff, and that in the opinion of the court the evidence upon the whole case preponderated against the plaintiff and in favor df the defendant.\u201d\nNo evidence whatever is set out. We perceive no error in the instructions, or any of them.\nThe judgment is affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice Adams"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "F. W. Becker, attorney for plaintiff in error.",
      "Miles J. Devine, and Matthew P. Brady, attorneys for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Mary Quinn v. The City of Chicago.\nBill op Exceptions\u2014Insufficient Statement of Evidence in.\u2014A statement in a hill of exceptions that \u201cthe plaintiff introduced evidence tending to sustain the allegations of her declaration herein, and the defendant introduced evidence in conflict with that of the plaintiff, and that in the opinion of the court the evidence upon the whole case preponderated against the plaintiff and in favor of the defendant\u201d is not sufficient for the court to consider assignments of error in the giving of instructions.\nTrespass on the Case, for personal injuries. Error to the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Philip Stein, Judge, presiding.\nHeard in this court at the Oetoher term, 1897.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed February 14, 1898.\nF. W. Becker, attorney for plaintiff in error.\nMiles J. Devine, and Matthew P. Brady, attorneys for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0399-01",
  "first_page_order": 399,
  "last_page_order": 400
}