{
  "id": 5280024,
  "name": "The Tonica and Petersburg Railroad Company, Appellant, v. John Roberts, Appellee",
  "name_abbreviation": "Tonica v. Roberts",
  "decision_date": "1859-04",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "224",
  "last_page": "225",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "22 Ill. 224"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 112,
    "char_count": 1106,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.541,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.666970501906556e-08,
      "percentile": 0.2930035689339417
    },
    "sha256": "808a6c9984e91685fb845de552938bbe5da507f0b33d8add82a740fe1371751b",
    "simhash": "1:a728148dc6563cd6",
    "word_count": 199
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:18:21.625654+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "The Tonica and Petersburg Railroad Company, Appellant, v. John Roberts, Appellee."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Breese, J.\nThis case does not substantially differ from the case of the same plaintiff v. Unsicker, ante.\nThe verdict for damages is large, but we cannot say that it is so much so as to authorize us to disturb it.\nThe road as it runs through the land, is an injury, and a serious one to the owner, and as he is near a well established market and railroad in full operation, it cannot be said, it is of any particular benefit to him, and no depot or station located on his land.\nThe judgment is affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Breese, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "A. L. Davison, for Appellant.",
      "B. S. Prettyman, and J. Roberts, for Appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The Tonica and Petersburg Railroad Company, Appellant, v. John Roberts, Appellee.\nAPPEAL PROM TAZEWELL.\nThe Supreme court will not disturb the verdict, assessing damages for a right of way, merely because such damages are large; when the owner of the land is not to receive any particular benefit from the location of the road.\nThis was a case like the preceding one of Unsicker against the same company, and the proof shows much the same state of facts.\nThe jury assessed damages at one thousand dollars.\nA. L. Davison, for Appellant.\nB. S. Prettyman, and J. Roberts, for Appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0224-01",
  "first_page_order": 226,
  "last_page_order": 227
}