{
  "id": 5786094,
  "name": "Ferdinand Walther v. James Abbott",
  "name_abbreviation": "Walther v. Abbott",
  "decision_date": "1899-03-14",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "368",
  "last_page": "369",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "80 Ill. App. 368"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 105,
    "char_count": 941,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.537,
    "sha256": "163d6e8718ef7b93e96f7f7b75913515109a123c9f2838f5cd08950f7b68e109",
    "simhash": "1:fa75fb7686a88064",
    "word_count": 158
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:19:11.973736+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Ferdinand Walther v. James Abbott."
    ],
    "opinions": [],
    "attorneys": [
      "Arthur Schroeder, attorney for appellant.",
      "Brandt & Hoffmann, attorneys for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Ferdinand Walther v. James Abbott.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County.\nIn an action to recover for personal injuries, brought by a passenger .against a carrier, the refusal to hold as a proposition of law that if the plaintiff was guilty of negligence which in any degree contributed to the injury complained of, he'could not recover, unless the negligence of the defendant was malicious and willful or wantonly reckless; and the modifying of another like proposition of law by inserting the words \u201c a material \u201d in lieu of \u201c any,\u201d preceding the word \u201c degree,\u201d and holding it, as modified, to be the law, was substantial error, where there was a close contest upon the merits of the case. Cicero & Proviso St. R. R. Co. v. Snider, 72 111. App. 300; C. C. Ry. Co. v. Canevin, 72 111. App. 81.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed March 14, 1899.\nArthur Schroeder, attorney for appellant.\nBrandt & Hoffmann, attorneys for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0368-01",
  "first_page_order": 374,
  "last_page_order": 375
}