{
  "id": 821735,
  "name": "The Toledo, Wabash and Western Railway Co. v. Andrew Nelson",
  "name_abbreviation": "Toledo, Wabash & Western Railway Co. v. Nelson",
  "decision_date": "1875-01",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "160",
  "last_page": "161",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "77 Ill. 160"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 145,
    "char_count": 1869,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.494,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.0839213085181212e-07,
      "percentile": 0.5632125656746784
    },
    "sha256": "2ec1e612fa5c17edcc70f4d6ce206152f32224c2571ac97df7276454221cb427",
    "simhash": "1:80132c919bf33675",
    "word_count": 327
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:20:30.956125+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "The Toledo, Wabash and Western Railway Co. v. Andrew Nelson."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Scholfield\ndelivered the opinion of the Court:\nThe evidence tends to show that the cow got upon the track of appellant's road through the negligence of its servants in failing to keep a gate at a farm crossing in repair. The jury found specially that this was the fact, and we are not able to say, from an examination of all the evidence in the record, that this finding was so clearly the result of prejudice and passion as to justify us in disregarding it, and setting the verdict aside.\nIn this view of the case, even conceding that the modification of appellant\u2019s instruction.is liable to the objection urged against it, it could not have prejudiced appellant, for the instruction, as asked, and as modified by the court, has no application to the case, save upon the hypothesis that the cow was upon the track of appellant\u2019s road without the fault of its servants.\nThe judgment is affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Scholfield"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. O. T. Reeves, for the appellant.",
      "Mr. A. Sample, for the appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The Toledo, Wabash and Western Railway Co. v. Andrew Nelson.\nNegligence\u2014liability of railroad for hilling stock. In a suit against a railway company to recover damages for the killing of the plaintiffs cow, where the evidence tended to show that the cow got upon the track of the company through the negligence of its servants in failing to keep a gate at a farm crossing in repair, it was held, that a verdict finding the company liable would not be disturbed.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Ford county; the Hon. Thomas F. Tipton, Judge, presiding.\nThis was an action commenced by Andrew Nelson, against the appellant, before a justice of the peace, to recover damages for the killing of the plaintiff's cow, and taken by appeal to the circuit court. On a trial in the latter court the plaintiff recovered judgment for $40 and costs, and the railway company appealed.\nMr. O. T. Reeves, for the appellant.\nMr. A. Sample, for the appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0160-01",
  "first_page_order": 160,
  "last_page_order": 161
}