Hawk v. Chicago, B.&N. R. Co.
| Decision Date | 13 May 1891 |
| Citation | 27 N.E. 450,138 Ill. 37 |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
| Parties | HAWK v. CHICAGO, B. & N. R. CO. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from appellate court, second district.
George L. Hoffman, for appellant.
James Shaw, for appellee.
Appellant brought this action in the Carroll circuit court, to recover damages for personal injury resulting from the alleged negligence of the servant of a connecting line of road, which was to complete appellee's contract of carriage. The trial resulted in a verdict and judgment for appellant for $6,000. On appeal to the appellate court of the second district this judgment was reversed, without remandment, and this appeal is from that judgment. Upon looking into the record, it is apparent that the judgment of the circuit court was predicated upon the finding of fact that the railroad company was guilty of negligence from which the injury to appellant resulted, while he was in the exercise of ordinary and proper care for his own safety, as alleged in his declaration. In the briefs of counsel in this court, it is contended, on one side, that the findings of fact by the lower court are sustained by the evidence, while, on the other, it is urged that the contrary holding of the appellate court is sustained. Looking into the opinion of the latter court, as we do for this purpose, we find a single legal question discussed, and that not necessarily conclusive of the right of recovery, while there is an elaborate discussion of the facts, and apparently a determination diametrically opposite to the facts as necessarily found by the trial court, both as the negligence of the railroad company and of appellee. The case is not reversed for error of law, but is, it is manifest, solely as the result of the finding of controlling facts by the appellate court differently from the finding of the trial court. The statute applicable in such cases provides: ‘If any final determination of any cause * * * shall be made by the appellate court, as the result, wholly or in part, of the finding of the facts concerning the matter in controversy, different from the finding of the court from which such cause was brought by appeal or writ of error, it shall be the duty of such appellate court to recite, in its final order, judgment, or decree, the facts as found, and the judgment of the appellate court shall be final and conclusive as to all matters of fact in controversy in such cause.’ Paragraph 88, c. 110, Starr & C. St. In such cases the court is precluded by statute from considering any errors assigned, calling in question the determination of the appellate court upon controverted questions of fact, and is restricted to re-examination of the case upon questions of law only. Paragraph 90, Id. The parties, in cases where an appeal lies from, or writ of error is prosecuted to, the appellate court, have the right to take the judgment of this court upon the law arising upon the facts. If, however, it appears that the law has been applied improperly upon the facts found by the appellate court, and recited in the final order, judgment, or decree, it will be the duty of this court, on review of such questions of law, to reverse the judgment of that court. When the facts are found, it is always a question of law as to what judgment should follow. It is manifest, therefore,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Laughlin v. Norton
...v. Scammon, 123 Ill, 601, 14 N. E. 666;Neer v. Illinois Central Railroad Co., 138 Ill. 29, 27 N. E. 705;Hawk v. Chicago, Burlington & Northern Railroad Co., 138 Ill. 37, 27 N. E. 450;Morris v. Wibaux, 159 Ill. 627, 43 N. E. 837. Looking to the pleadings to see what issues were formed thereb......
-
Iroquois Furnace Co. v. Elphicke
...to the trial court. Insurance Co. v. Scammon, 123 Ill. 601, 14 N. E. 666;Neer v. Railroad Co., 138 Ill. 29, 27 N. E. 705;Hawk v. Railroad Co., 138 Ill. 37, 27 N. E. 450; Hogan v. City of Chicago, supra; Hayes v. Insurance Co., 125 Ill. 626, 18 N. E. 322,1 L. R. A. 303. It is said that one o......
-
Nat'l Life Ins. Co. v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.
...court has discussed and applied the law on this subject: Williams v. Forbes, 114 Ill. 167, 28 N. E. 463;Hawk v. Chicago, Burlington & Northern Railroad Co., 138 Ill. 37, 27 N. E. 450;County of La Salle v. Milligan, 143 Ill. 321, 32 N. E. 196;Hawk v. Chicago, Burlington & Northern Railroad C......
-
Swisher v. Illinois Cent. R. Co.
...to other issues, it may be presumed that the appellate court found, in respect of the latter, as did the trial court.’ Hawk v. Railroad Co., 138 Ill. 37, 27 N. E. 450. In Hayes v. Insurance Co., 125 Ill. 626, 18 N. E. 322, we said (page 640, 125 Ill., and page 328, 18 N. E.): ‘Upon the fail......