Gascoigne v. Metro. West Side Elevated Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 08 April 1909
• Citation: 239 Ill. 18,87 N.E. 883
• Parties: GASCOIGNE v. METROPOLITAN WEST SIDE ELEVATED RY. CO.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

239 Ill. 18

87 N.E. 883

GASCOIGNE

v.METROPOLITAN WEST SIDE ELEVATED RY. CO.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Feb. 19, 1909.

Rehearing Denied April 8, 1909.

Appeal from Appellate Court, First District, on Appeal from Superior Court, Cook County; A. H. Chetlain, Judge.

Action by Alice Gascoigne against the Metropolitan West Side Elevated Railway Company. From a judgment of the Appellate Court affirming a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.Addison L. Gardner and William R. Moss (W. W. Gurley, of counsel), for appellant.

John F. Waters and William L. Martin (Joel Baker, of counsel), for appellee.

Appellee brought an action on the case against appellant in the superior court of Cook county in March, 1905, for personal injuries alleged to have been received November 8, 1904, while passing through an exit turnstile at the Fifth avenue terminal station of appellant's railway in Chicago. The allegations in the declaration as to negligence and the manner in which plaintiff was injured are substantially as follows: ‘That said defendant carelessly, negligently, and wrongfully constructed a dangerous and unsafe means of exit for its passengers by and through a certain unsafe and dangerous iron turnstile, through which unsafe and dangerous iron turnstile said plaintiff was directed and it became and was necessary for her to pass in order to reach said Franklin street,’ and, ‘while in the exercise of due care and precaution, in passing through said iron turnstile, unavoidably was caught by her left foot between one of the horizontal projecting rounds of said turnstile and another stationary round which projected to and beyond the end of said iron round and toward the center of said turnstile, and the left foot of said plaintiff was then caught, as aforesaid, with such force and violence that the plaintiff was thereby then thrown with great force and violence and was struck with great force by other projecting horizontal rounds of said turnstile.’ The turnstile was one of a pair set between the curved walls of a passageway on what is termed a ‘cross-over’ platform. The passengers who desired to pass out to Franklin street first went down a flight of stairs, then through these turnstiles, and then along a platform 10 or 12 feet wide, and downstairs to the street. Each of the turnstiles consisted of a hollow iron post six inches in diameter and about six feet high, from which four sets of arms projected, each set being at right angles with the next set. The arms were made of 2 1/2 inch iron pipe and about 2 feet and 10 inches long. From two stationary posts set at equal distances from the center column of the turnstile and just beyond the reach of the revolving arms extended rows of arms composed of iron pipe of the same diameter as the revolving arms. At the bottom of the post was in it, at equal distances from each other. As the post turned, a dog or ratchet was intended to fall into each groove, thereby preventing the post from turning in the opposite direction. A spring acted on the dog to press it down into the grooves as the post revolved. The stationary arms were to prevent a person passing through except in the direction the turnstile was intended to turn. The lowest arm of the turnstile passes under the lowest stationary arm, and was it least 8 1/2 inches above the floor.

Appellant filed a plea of general issue to th declaration and the cause was tried before a jury, which returned a verdict against appellant for $5,000. On motion for new trial being overruled and judgment entered, an appeal was prayed to the Appellate Court for the First District, where the judgment of the lower court was affirmed. This appeal is further prosecuted.

CARTER, J. (after stating the facts as above).

Appellee came to this station on the morning of the accident on the cars of appellant, leaving them at said Fifth avenue terminal station. She attempted to pass through one of said two turnstiles, and her left foot was caught in it, and she was thrown agaist the arms of the turnstiles. No one noticed her until after she was injured, and as to the way her foot was caught her testimony is the only evidence. She testified that she pushed against the arm in front of her, and set the turnstile in motion; that it ‘got away’ from her, and the arms behind her struck against her, and that her left foot was caught by the lower rung of the turnstile and bent back; that she fell against the arms of the turnstile in front of her; and that her left foot and ankle were injured, and she was hurt in the groin and a hernia was thereby produced. The testimony also tends to show that the ratchet at the bottom of the...