sample_opinion.json

{"name":"Saint Paul Holmes v. John Doe","number":"981428","date_published":"1999-04-16","is_published":true,"court":"Supreme Court of Virginia","location":"Richmond","author":"Charles L. McCormick, III","outcome":"Affirmed","parties":{"plaintiff":"Saint Paul Holmes","defendant":"John Doe"},"judges":["Charles L. McCormick, III"],"attorneys":{"plaintiff":"Lionel Hutz, Esq.","defendant":"Miguel Sanchez"},"key_sentence": "Lee’s expert testimony was appropriate to aid the jury in putting this factual evidence into an appropriate context from which the jury could draw its own conclusions.", "summary": "In a jury trial of an automobile accident liability claim, the trial court properly permitted the introduction of expert testimony concerning the relationship between tire tread depth and hydroplaning by a motor vehicle. The judgment is affirmed.","type":"civil","cited_laws":["38.2-2206","46.2-1043","8.01-401.3"],"cited_cases":["Bush v. State of Louisiana, 395 So. 2d 916, 919 (La. Ct. App. 1981)","Compton v. Commonwealth, 219 Va. 716, 726, 250 S.E.2d 749, 755-56 (1979)(citation omitted)","Neblett v. Hunter, 207 Va. 335, 339-40, 150 S.E.2d 115, 118 (1966)","Lawson v. John Doe, 239 Va. 477, 482-83, 391 S.E.2d 333, 336 (1990)"],"text":{"pdf":"http: //www.courts.state.va.us/opinions/opnscvwp/1981428.pdf","text":"rulings/1981428.txt"}}