Chicago & A.R. Co. v. Kelly
Decision Date | 05 April 1889 |
Citation | 127 Ill. 637,21 N.E. 203 |
Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
Parties | CHICAGO & A. R. CO. v. KELLY. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from appellate court, Third district.
Isaac N. Phillips and Williams & Capen, for appellants.
Stevenson & Ewing, for appellee.
This was an action brought by Catharine Kelly, administratrix of the estate of Patrick Kelly, deceased, against the Chicago & Alton Railroad Company, to recover damages for the death of Patrick Kelly, which was caused, as is alleged, by the negligence of the defendant. On a trial before a jury in the circuit court a judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff, which on appeal was affirmed in the appellate court. Various errors have been assigned in the record by counsel for the defendant, but many of them relate to questions of fact which, under our present statute, are not reviewable in this court. Such questions of law as arise in the record and are subject to review in this court will be considered. The facts which led to a verdict in the circuit court may be briefly stated, as follows: Kelly was working for the company as a section hand under James Mehan, a section boss. Mehan testified that Kelly's duties were as follows: On the 5th day of January, 1886, a construction train left Bloomington with 22 cars loaded with rock, to be distributed along the track a few miles south-west of Hopedale, to be used in ballasting the track. The train had on board an engineer, fireman, conductor and two brakemen. The section hands under Mehan, including Kelly, boarded the train as it passed through Hopedale for the purpose of assisting in unloading the rock along the track. The men finished unloading the rock between 3 and 4 o'clock. When the train reached Hopedale these section men left the train to resume their duties as section hands. What occurred from that time to the death of Kelly is stated by the appellate court in its opinion, as follows: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Parker v. The Hannibal & St. Joseph Railroad Company
...of Kentucky held that an engineer of a passenger train and those in charge of a freight train were not fellow-servants. In Railroad v. Kelly, 127 Ill. 637, it was held that section hand and those in charge of a construction train were not fellow-servants. The court there said: "What co-oper......
- Strottman v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.
-
Parker v. Hannibal & St. J. R. Co.
...of Kentucky held that an engineer of a passenger train and those in charge of a freight train were not fellow servants. In Railway Co. v. Kelly, 127 Ill. 637, 21 N. E. Rep. 203, it was held that a section hand and those in charge of a construction train were not fellow servants. The court t......
-
Stephani v. Southern Pacific Co.
... ... That ... the engineer and the plaintiff were not fellow servants see, ... Chicago, etc., R. Co. v. Ross, 15 S.Ct. 190 ... Unless ... plaintiff and the conductor were in ... v ... Johnson, 114 Ill. 57; R. R. Co. v. Morando, 108 ... Ill. 580; Ry. Co. v. Kelly, 127 Ill. 631; 21 N.E ... 203; Ry. Co. v. Morando, 92 Ill. 302; Dixon v ... Ry. Co., 109 Mo ... ...