{
  "id": 4980744,
  "name": "Albert Mendel et al. Plaintiffs in Error, vs. The Lake Street Elevated Railroad Company et al. Defendants in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Mendel v. Lake Street Elevated Railroad",
  "decision_date": "1920-02-18",
  "docket_number": "No. 12531",
  "first_page": "292",
  "last_page": "292",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "292 Ill. 292"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 143,
    "char_count": 1590,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.707,
    "sha256": "6749572e61caba504ee71d8c960205e8b6782318368b36543e26450a52590778",
    "simhash": "1:5c6f70e18efa77a1",
    "word_count": 261
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:04:26.585354+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Albert Mendel et al. Plaintiffs in Error, vs. The Lake Street Elevated Railroad Company et al. Defendants in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam :\nThis was an action brought by plaintiffs in error to recover damages for property abutting on the elevated structure of the so-called Loop elevated railway in Chicago, the property being situated on the northeast corner of VanBuren and LaSalle streets, fronting on both streets. After the pleadings were settled the case was tried before a jury, which returned a verdict in favor of the defendants in error. This writ of error has been sued out to review the record.\nIt is conceded by counsel for both sides that the legal questions raised on this writ of error are identical with those raised in Geohegan v. Union Elevated Railroad Co. (ante, p. 261.) The refused instructions asked in the Geohegan case are substantially the same as in this case. What is said in that case must control here, and therefore we need not discuss further the questions here raised.\nThe judgment of the superior court of Cook county will be affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.\nCartwright and Duncan, JJ., dissenting.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam :"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Harry S. Mecartney, for plaintiffs in error.",
      "Gardner, Foote, Burns & Morrow, (Randall W. Burns, of counsel,) for defendants in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "(No. 12531.\nJudgment affirmed.)\nAlbert Mendel et al. Plaintiffs in Error, vs. The Lake Street Elevated Railroad Company et al. Defendants in Error.\nOpinion filed February 18, 1920\nRehearing denied April 14, 1920.\nThis case is controlled by the decision in Geohegan v. Union Elevated Railroad Co. (ante, p. 261.)\nCartwright and Duncan, JJ., dissenting.\nWrit op Error, to the Superior Court of Cook county ; the Hon. W. Eenimore Cooper, Judge, presiding.\nHarry S. Mecartney, for plaintiffs in error.\nGardner, Foote, Burns & Morrow, (Randall W. Burns, of counsel,) for defendants in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0292-01",
  "first_page_order": 292,
  "last_page_order": 292
}