Gills v. New York, C. & St. L.R. Co.

• Decision Date: 06 February 1931
• Docket Number: No. 20358.,20358.
• Citation: 174 N.E. 523,342 Ill. 455
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court
• Parties: GILLS v. NEW YORK, C. & St. L. R. CO.

342 Ill. 455

174 N.E. 523

GILLS

v.NEW YORK, C. & St. L. R. CO.

No. 20358.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Dec. 18, 1930.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 6, 1931.

Action by John Gills, alias Jack Gills, against the New York, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad Company. From a judgment of the Appellate Court (258 Ill. App. 11), affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals, a certificate of importance having been granted.

Affirmed.

Appeal from Appellate Court, Fourth District, on Appeal from Circuit Court, Madison County; Jesse R. Brown, Judge.

Pope & Driemeyer, of East St. Louis, for appellant.

Harry Faulkner, of Granite City, for appellee.

FARMER, J.

John Gills, alias Jack Gills (hereafter referred to as plaintiff), obtained a verdict in the circuit court of Madison county against the New York, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad Company (hereafter designated as defendant), for $1200. The court rendered judgment on the verdict, and defendant appealed to the Appellate Court for the Fourth district. That court affirmed the judgment (258 Ill. App. 11), and, a certificate of importance having been granted by that court, an appeal has been perfected to this court to review the record.

This was an action for damages to the person and to the automobile of plaintiff, caused by a collision with one of defendant's passenger trains. The case was submitted to the jury on the third and fourth counts of the declaration. The third count charged defendant operated a railroad through Madison county which crossed a certain road or highway leading northwardly from the Edwardsville road and across defendant's right of way; that the road had been used across defendant's right of way daily by a great number of people for many years, of which use the defendant well knew; that defendant carelessly and negligently operated its train, and as a result there was a collision with plaintiff's automobile which he was driving on the highway at the railroad crossing and the damaging of plaintiff and his car. The fourth count differs slightly from the third, and charges the train was driven to and over the crossing without any warning or signal of its approach.

The facts are that the highway which crosses the railroad is called the Buehler road and extends north from the Edwardsville road across defendant's right of way and leads to a settlement of houses north of the tracks. There are five railroad tracks crossing the Buehler road, and the tracks extend in an easterly and westerly direction parallel with the Edwardsville highway and about 300 feet north thereof. The first track on the south side is defendant's main track, the second is its side or passing track, then there are two tracks of another railroad, and north of them is the track of the Illinois Traction System. The Traction System has a station there, called Buehler station. The highway had been in use for fifteen or more years. The crossingis planked and cindered, and defendant had knowledge of its existence. Plaintiff was returning home from a shopping trip to Granite City about 4 o'clock one afternoon during the latter part of January, 1929. He was driving a model T Ford coupe and turned off of the Edwardsville road into the Buehler road. He stopped at a mail box and proceeded north toward the railroad crossing. A freight train of defendant was proceeding eastwardly along the second or passing track. The engine was emitting smoke and the moving train was making a noise. Plaintiff stopped near the crossing to wait for the freight train to pass, and after it passed he looked to the right and to the left, saw nothing aproaching, and started over the crossing. As he got on the crossing a passenger train, consisting of an engine and two coaches and which was running west, struck his car. The testimony was that it gave no warning of its approach by ringing a bell or blowing a whistle. Plaintiff was a man thirty-two years of age and possessed good hearing and good eyesight. He testified he looked both ways and never saw the approaching train; that the freight train which he waited on to pass before he drove onto the crossing had from thirty to fifty cars in it; that he stopped approximately thirty-five feet from the south track; that before he started to cross the track he looked in both directions for approaching trains and saw none; that he heard no whistle or bell; that his eyesight and hearing were good; that he was driving slowly as he started to cross the track and after he got on the track he saw the train, which struck his car and carried him several hundred feet down the track; that the train came to a stop and plaintiff was rescued from his position; that his car was demolished and he was personally injured rather severely; that he was treated in a hospital two weeks and was then taken home and cared for by a nurse five or six weeks; that he suffered a good deal of pain, and that his injury was in the pelvis and he was otherwise bruised in his body. He...