{
  "id": 5223718,
  "name": "John G. Byrne v. Guiseppi Panesi",
  "name_abbreviation": "Byrne v. Panesi",
  "decision_date": "1898-05-31",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "164",
  "last_page": "165",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "77 Ill. App. 164"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 191,
    "char_count": 2505,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.603,
    "sha256": "0bdd016d59ae83fee9db95890107d6424e297103c16f4f33ce81efe9de6e1b29",
    "simhash": "1:bfecf74c4eacfe44",
    "word_count": 434
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:36:43.320990+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "John G. Byrne v. Guiseppi Panesi."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mb. Peesiding Justice Shepabd\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nThis suit was based upon a claimed contract of employment of appellant to'travel' with appellee\u2019s invalid son as a physician and nurse. tJpon appeal from a justice\u2019s court to the County Court a trial resulted in a verdict and judgment-for thirty dollars. It would seem that there should have been a verdict for a larger sum, if any at all were to be recovered, but because the judgment must be reversed for error in the giving of one of defendant\u2019s instructions wre will not comment upon the facts of the case to the possible prejudice of either party upon the next trial.\nOne of the assigned errors is the giving of improper instructions at the request of appellee.\nThe second instruction given for appellee was as follows:\n\u201c The court instructs the jury that the plaintiff can not maintain an action for service as a physician, unless he proved by competent evidence that he had a license duly issued by the State Board of Health, and if the same has not been proven, then the jury will find a verdict for the defendant.\u201d\nThe contract, if any, was for appellant\u2019s services both as a nurse and physician, and was acted upon, though terminated before a full performance as .to the time originally arranged for the journey that was taken. There was no claim, and no evidence to support a claim, for services as physician separated from those as nurse. The two kinds of service in contemplation, and in fact rendered together, were as nurse and as physician, and to give an instruction including the element of one kind of service and excluding all reference to the other was error.\nThe judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mb. Peesiding Justice Shepabd"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Feed H. Atwood and Frank B. Pease, attorneys for appellant.",
      "Johnson & McDannold, attorneys for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "John G. Byrne v. Guiseppi Panesi.\n' 1. Instructions\u2014Services of a Physician and Nurse.\u2014In an action to recover for the services of a physician and nurse, it is error to instruct the jury that the plaintiff can not maintain an action for service as a physician, unless he proves by competent evidence that he had a license duly issued by the State Board of Health.\nAssumpsit, for services. Trial in the County Court of Cook County, on appeal from a justice of the peace. The Hon. C. W. Raymond, Judge, presiding. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Appeal by defendant.\nHeard in the Branch Appellate Court of the First District, at the March term, 1898.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed May 31, 1898.\nFeed H. Atwood and Frank B. Pease, attorneys for appellant.\nJohnson & McDannold, attorneys for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0164-01",
  "first_page_order": 166,
  "last_page_order": 167
}