McCormack v. Haan
| Decision Date | 29 September 1960 |
| Docket Number | No. 35629,35629 |
| Citation | 169 N.E.2d 239,20 Ill.2d 75 |
| Parties | Ruth Mc,CORMACK, Appellant, v. Wayne T. HAAN et al. (Neil M. Foulds, Admr., Appellee). |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
Bull, Ludens & Potter, Morrison, and John C. Pignatelli, Sterling (Robert H. Potter, Morrison, of counsel), for appellant.
Dixon & Gunner, Dixon (William R. Gunner, Dixon, of counsel), for appellee.
The plaintiff brought this action to recover for personal injuries she sustained while riding as a guest in a car driven by her brother-in-law, Patrick L. McGann. The McGann car was struck by a car owned by Thomas Haan and driven by his minor son, Wayne T. Haan. Of the four occupants of the McGann car, only the plaintiff survived. The defendants were the two Haans and Neil M. Foulds, administrator of the estate of Patrick L. McGann. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty as to the Haans and a verdict of $15,000 for the plaintiff against the administrator.
Judgment was entered upon both verdicts. The administrator appealed from the judgment against him, and the plaintiff cross-appealed from the judgment in favor of the Haans. The Appellate Court held that the abstract did not properly present the errors relied upon by the plaintiff in her cross-appeal against the Haans, and affirmed the judgment in their favor. No question concerning that aspect of the case is now before us. Upon the administrator's appeal, the Appellate Court held that 'the testimony of plaintiff constituted binding judicial admissions which made it the duty of the trial court to direct a verdict in favor of the defendant administrator' and reversed the judgment. McCormack v. Haan, 23 Ill.App.2d 87, 98, 161 N.E.2d 599. We allowed the plaintiff's petition for leave to appeal.
The McGann car was proceeding through an intersection when it was struck by the Haan car which entered the intersection from the left. The Haan car was traveling at 60 to 65 miles an hour on a preferential highway. The entrance to this highway from the road on which the McGann car was traveling was controlled by a stop sign. At the time of the accident this stop sign was so located that it was necessary to advance beyond it toward the highway in order to have an unobstructed view.
During the course of the trial, the plaintiff unequivocally testified that McGann stopped between the stop sign and the highway. She testified that she was riding in the right front seat, that she looked to the right and said 'clear right' and that McGann looked to the left and then proceeded slowly across the intersection. An occupant of the Haan car testified that the McGann car was going at the same speed as the Haan car, and that it 'did not decrease its speed as it came up to the intersection but it seemed to have hestitated in the intersection.' Two other occupants of the Hann car testified. Neither of them saw the McGann car stop, but they agreed that it was moving very slowly. One of them testified. 'As we approached the intersection it pulled out in front of us.'
The complaint alleged, in the alternative, four acts of wilful and wanton misconduct on the part of McGann. It charged that he failed to stop before entering a preferential highway, failed to keep a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
N. Shore Cmty. Bank & Trust Co. v. Sheffield Wellington LLC
...(citing Michael H. Graham, Cleary & Graham's Handbook of Illinois Evidence § 802.11, at 616 (5th ed. 1990), and McCormack v. Haan, 20 Ill.2d 75, 78, 169 N.E.2d 239 (1960) ). Accordingly, “ ‘[t]he doctrine of judicial admissions requires thoughtful study for its application so that justice n......
-
Caponi v. Larry's 66
...(Hansen v. Ruby Construction Co. (1987), 155 Ill.App.3d 475, 480, 108 Ill.Dec. 140, 508 N.E.2d 301; see also McCormack v. Haan (1960), 20 Ill.2d 75, 78-79, 169 N.E.2d 239.) It must concern a concrete fact and not be merely a matter of inference, opinion, estimate, or uncertain memory (Hanso......
-
Dunning v. Dynegy Midwest Generation, Inc.
...defeats his own claim depends upon an evaluation of all of his testimony, and not just a portion of it. McCormack v. Haan, 20 Ill.2d 75, 78, 169 N.E.2d 239, 240–41 (1960). The abuse of discretion standard focuses on the context of the purported admission:“What constitutes a judicial admissi......
-
Installco Inc. v. Whiting Corp.
...testimony, and not just a part of it.'" Hansen, 155 Ill.App.3d at 481, 108 Ill.Dec. 140, 508 N.E.2d 301, quoting McCormack v. Haan, 20 Ill.2d 75, 78, 169 N.E.2d 239 (1960). The record on appeal does not contain a full transcript of Ehret's deposition. Moreover, the fact that Ehret was not a......