Celner v. Prather

Decision Date07 August 1939
Docket NumberGen. No. 9393.
Citation301 Ill.App. 224,22 N.E.2d 397
PartiesCELNER v. PRATHER.
CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from Circuit Court, Winnebago County; Arthur E. Fisher, Judge.

Action for personal injuries sustained in automobile accident, by Joseph Celner against Tirrie O. Prather, administrator of estate of Julian Dyboski, deceased. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial.

Ralph S. Zahm, of Rockford, for appellant.

Carl A. Swenson, of Rockford, for appellee.

HUFFMAN, Justice.

Appellee brought this suit for personal injuries sustained in an automobile accident while riding as a guest of appellant's decedent, Julian Dyboski. Appellee and two young ladies were riding with the deceased in his automobile upon state highway No. 2, enroute from Rockford to Oregon, Illinois. The accident happened at about eleven thirty on the night of May 26, 1937, at a place a few miles north of Byron, Illinois. The automobile which the deceased was driving, hit the end of a concrete abutment adjacent to a culvert which crossed the road, wrecking the car, killing the driver thereof, and injuring appellee and the two young ladies.

Appellee brought this suit for damages for his injuries sustained, claiming that the deceased driver was operating the automobile in a willful and wanton manner and that he sustained his injuries as the result of the willful and wanton misconduct of the deceased, while riding as his guest. Appellee further alleges that he requested the deceased to drive the car more slowly and carefully, which the deceased refused to do; and that it was dark and raining and the pavement was wet.

The young ladies in the car did not testify, and there is no testimony in the case regarding the accident, by any witness who was present at the time. Dr. Moffatt and Dr. Culhane testified regarding appellee's injuries. Frank Carmak, who was engaged in the automobile salvage business, testified regarding the condition of the car after the accident. Stanley Musialek, an automobile mechanic, also testified regarding the condition of the car following the accident. Orville Vakener, an undertaker, and Max Weston, an attorney, testified as to the conditions they found existing following the accident. There is no dispute with respect to the fact that appellee was riding as a guest in the deceased's automobile, that the accident occurred, and that appellee was injured. The only witnesses who testified, were called by the plaintiff below, and their testimony was concerning the existing conditions following the accident.

[1][2][3] The evidence shows that it had been raining and the highway, at and near the place in question, a winding road. The evidence further...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Holsman v. Darling State St. Corp.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • June 28, 1955
    ...conclusion is the only one that can reasonably be drawn therefrom. In support of their argument they cite the case of Celner v. Prather, 301 Ill.App. 224, 22 N.E.2d 397. In Lindroth v. Walgreen Co., 407 Ill. 121, 94 N.E.2d 847, 853, the Supreme Court set out the correct rule with reference ......
  • Griffin Lumber Co. v. Harper
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • March 7, 1946
    ... ... Seawell, 183 Va. 379, 32 S.E.2d 62; Grinstead v ... Mayhew, 167 Va. 19, 187 S.E. 515; Law v ... Gallegher, 39 Del. 189, 197 A. 479; Celner v ... Prather, 301 Ill.App. 224, 22 N.E.2d 297 ... The ... judgment will be reversed and the cause remanded ... Reversed ... ...
  • Gentry v. Shop ‘n Save Warehouse Foods Inc
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Central District of Illinois
    • April 7, 2010
    ...be inferred, when the existence of another inconsistent fact can be drawn with equal certainty.” Id. (quoting Celner v. Prather, 301 Ill.App. 224, 227, 22 N.E.2d 397 (2d Dist.1939)). In Brett, the court concluded the opinion as follows:[I]t is possible for someone to trip over almost anythi......
  • Barnes v. Lackey
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • January 12, 1959
    ...attending circumstances of the case as to justify a finding of wilful and wanton misconduct on the part of Kazunas. In Celner v. Prather, 301 Ill.App. 224, 22 N.E.2d 397, the evidence showed that it had been raining and the highway, at and near the scene of the casualty, a winding road. The......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT