{
  "id": 2622115,
  "name": "Joseph Gilson v. Michael Collins",
  "name_abbreviation": "Gilson v. Collins",
  "decision_date": "1872-09",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "136",
  "last_page": "137",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "66 Ill. 136"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 144,
    "char_count": 2183,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.572,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.673387124761456e-08,
      "percentile": 0.5289860528548189
    },
    "sha256": "7a0a15e762faf0916d6cbfd8f41dad7a41513f60b309a2a47ab3e5edce20ac2f",
    "simhash": "1:20d7a9a7f6b71606",
    "word_count": 385
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:46:41.963849+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Joseph Gilson v. Michael Collins."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice McAllister\ndelivered the opinion of the Court:\nThis was a suit by appellee to recover wages for services as engineer upon appellant\u2019s tug boat.\nOn the trial, appellant gave evidence tending to show that \u2022 the boat was damaged by fire whilst in the charge of appellee as engineer; that it was the result of a breach of duty on his part, and sought to recoup for these damages in this action.\nThe court instructed the jury, on request of appellee\u2019s counsel, \u201cthat an engineer of a tug boat is not an insurer of the boat upon which he works, and is not responsible for damage to the machinery which is not directly attributable to his negligence.\u201d\nThis was a question of liability of agent to the principal. Story says: \u201cThe loss or damage need not be directly or immediately caused by the act which is done or omitted to be done. It will be sufficient if it be fairly attributable to it as a natural result, or a just consequence.\u201d Story on Ag. sec. 217 (c).\nThe instruction was erroneous, calculated to, and no doubt did, mislead the jury.\nJudgment reversed and cause remanded.\nJudgment reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice McAllister"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Smith, Upton & Waterman, and Mr. Homer Cook, for the appellant.",
      "Mr. William H. Condon,, for the appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Joseph Gilson v. Michael Collins.\nMaster and servant\u2014liability of servant to mastw' for injury resulting from neglect of duty. In an action by an engineer to recover his wages for services on defendant\u2019s tug boat, the evidence tended to show that the boat was damaged by fire while in plaintiff\u2019s charge, and that it was the result of a breach of duty on his part, and the defendant sought to recoup these damages. The court instructed the jury for plaintiff \u201cthat an engineer of a tug boat is not an insurer of the boat upon which he works, and is not responsible for damage to the machinery which is not directly attributable to his negligenceHeld, that the instruction was erroneous, and calculated to mislead the jury. The engineer was liable, if the damage could be fairly attributable to the act done or omitted by him as a natural result or a just consequence.\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. William A. Porter, Judge, presiding.\nMessrs. Smith, Upton & Waterman, and Mr. Homer Cook, for the appellant.\nMr. William H. Condon,, for the appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0136-01",
  "first_page_order": 136,
  "last_page_order": 137
}