Chicago City Ry. Co. v. Bennett

• Decision Date: 21 February 1905
• Citation: 214 Ill. 26,73 N.E. 343
• Parties: CHICAGO CITY RY. CO. v. BENNETT.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

214 Ill. 26

73 N.E. 343

CHICAGO CITY RY. CO.

v.BENNETT.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Feb. 21, 1905.

Appeal from Appellate Court, First District.

Action by Hannah Bennett against the Chicago City Railway Company. From a judgment of the Appellate Court affirming a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

William J. Hynes, Samuel S. Page, and Watson J. Ferry (Mason B. Starring, of counsel), for appellant.

James E. McGrath (John C. Trainor, of counsel), for appellee.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Court for the First District affirming a judgment for $3,500 rendered by the superior court of Cook county in an action on the case brought by Hannah Bennett, the appellee, against the Chicago City Railway Company, the appellant, to recover damages for a personal injury sustained by her through the alleged negligence of the appellant. The declaration, in so far as evidence was offered to support it, alleged that the plaintiff on September 18, 1900, was a passenger on a street car used and operated by the defendant; that the defendant ran said car in a negligent, careless, and unskillful manner, by reason whereof it was run at a high rate of speed, and, by reason of the negligent, careless, and unskillful manner in which said street car was run and operated, it collided with a loaded truck, by reason whereof plaintiff was thrown with great force and violence against the forward part of the car and was injured. The defendant filed the general issue. A trial was had, and a verdict for $7,000 was returned by the jury. A motion for a new trial and a motion in arrest of judgment were respectively overruled by the court. The court required the plaintiff to remit $3,500 from the verdict, and then entered a judgment for $3,500 in her favor. The defendant appealed to the Appellate Court for the First District, and, that court having affirmed the judgment of the superior court, this appeal is prosecuted.

The evidence tends to show that the collision occurred on the Halsted Street Viaduct, near Fortieth street, in the city of Chicago; that the motive power of the car was electricity; that the truck, drawn by one horse, was passing along the viaduct, and that the wheels of the trucks, when first observed by some of the witnesses, were within the car tracks; that the truck was loaded with marble slabs; that it had started to turn out of the car tracks, and only one of the rear wheels was within the tracks when the collision occurred, and that only the rear corner of the truck was struck; that the car was going at the rate of 15 miles per hour, and when it struck the truck it knocked it off the track, scattered the marble slabs on the ground, almost turned the truck around, reversing its position, throwing the driver off, and forcing the horse almost off the roadway of the viaduct, and then proceeded a distance of 25 or 30 feet before it was stopped; and that the wagon and front of the car were both considerably damaged by the collision. At the conclusion of all the evidence in the cause the defendant moved the court to instruct the jury to find the defendant not guilty. The motion was denied, and its denial is assigned as error. It is also assigned as error that the...