Moore v. Yearwood
| Decision Date | 05 February 1960 |
| Docket Number | No. 59-0-5,59-0-5 |
| Citation | 164 N.E.2d 215,24 Ill.App.2d 248 |
| Parties | James R. MOORE et al., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John L. YEARWOOD et al., Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
James L. Reed, Edwardsville, Kenneth F. Kelly, Edwardsville, of counsel, for appellant.
Irving M. Wiseman, Alton, for appellee.
This is an appeal from the Circuit Court of Madison County in which judgment was entered on a verdict of $3600.00 in favor of Plaintiff, James R. Moore, as against defendant, John L. Yearwood.
The action was brought to recover damages for personal injuries resulting from an assault upon plaintiff by one Albert (Red) Baldwin while both men were patrons in defendant's tavern. Defendant was not present at the time. Other counts of the complaint involving dram shop liability are not involved on this appeal, and the sole issue before us results from the count of the complaint predicated upon the common law action of negligence as against defendant. It is the theory of the defendant in this Court that there is no liability on part of the defendant, the owner and proprietor of the tavern, for the reason that the evidence failed to prove any negligence on the part of the defendant toward plaintiff. Plaintiff concedes that there should be a reversal and remandment for a new trial, but contends that a case was made out as against defendant and under the evidence that the post trial motion was properly denied.
The basic question before us is whether there was any showing of negligence on part of defendant which could be the basis of a recovery.
The facts, as shown by the record, disclose that the plaintiff was not injured by any act of defendant or any employee of defendant, but by an assault made upon him by another patron in the tavern. It is contended by the plaintiff that defendant's bartender was negligent in not anticipating the assault upon the plaintiff by the other party, Red Baldwin, and in not protecting plaintiff from such assault. There was evidence to the effect that, when Baldwin saw that the plaintiff was intoxicated and arguing, that Baldwin asked the bartender if he needed a bouncer and the bartender said, 'No. I will take care of it myself.' There was some evidence that Baldwin followed the bartender over to the plaintiff and that plaintiff called Baldwin a name and Baldwin then hit him with a beer bottle which caused plaintiff's injuries. The action happened very rapidly and during the period when the bartender had requested that plaintiff leave and was escorting him to the door.
From the record it is difficult to visualize how defendant's agent, the bartender, could have foreseen...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Baca v. Baca
...420, 82 A.2d 210 (App.Div. 1951); Gurren v. Casperson, 147 Wash. 257, 265 P. 472 (1928). Defendants rely upon Moore v. Yearwood, 24 Ill.App.2d 248, 164 N.E.2d 215 (1960); Huddleston v. Clark, 186 Kan. 209, 349 P.2d 888 (1960); Swanson v. Dugout, Inc., 256 Minn. 371, 98 N.W.2d 213 (1959); Ro......
-
Mrzlak v. Ettinger
...this basic rule. (See Mancha v. Field Museum of Natural History (1972) 5 Ill.App.3d 699, 283 N.E.2d 899; Moore v. Yearwood (1960) 24 Ill.App.2d 248, 164 N.E.2d 215.) Defendants argue that the evidence shows that the criminal act was unforeseeable, that the Club had no knowledge of previous ......
-
Taylor v. Hocker, 80-525
...have anticipated it. Cf. Altepeter v. Virgil State Bank (2d Dist. 1952), 345 Ill.App. 585, 104 N.E.2d 334; Moore v. Yearwood (4th Dist. 1960), 24 Ill.App.2d 248, 164 N.E.2d 215. Other jurisdictions, however, have had occasion to consider factual circumstances similar to the case at bar. It ......
-
Filas v. Daher
...was ensuing in time to have stopped it before plaintiff, patron, was injured. Finally, the conclusion reached in Moore v. Yearwood, 24 Ill.App.2d 248, 164 N.E.2d 215 (1960), is worth noting. There, the court reversed a judgment for plaintiff, stating that there was no indication that the pa......