Rockford v. Isom Lewis.

• Decision Date: 31 January 1871
• Citation: 58 Ill. 49,1871 WL 11181
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court
• Parties: ROCKFORD, ROCK ISLAND & ST. LOUIS RAILROAD CO.v.ISOM LEWIS.

58 Ill. 49

1871 WL 11181 (Ill.)

ROCKFORD, ROCK ISLAND & ST. LOUIS RAILROAD CO.

v.ISOM LEWIS.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

January Term, 1871.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE1. NEGLIGENCE-- liability of a railroad company for killing stock.

In an action against the Rockford, Rock Island & St. Louis Railroad Company, to recover the value of a cow, belonging to the plaintiff, alleged to have been killed by an engine and train on the defendants' road, it was held, that although the accident occurred at a place where the company were not bound to fence their track, and defendants were not guilty of any wanton or wilful neglect, yet, if by the exercise of ordinary care and skill upon their part, they could have prevented the injury, they were, nevertheless, liable for the damages sustained.2. EVIDENCE-- presumption.

And upon objection that the evidence failed to connect the defendants with the injury, the testimony of the engineer, “that he was on the train, on the 17th day of June, 1869, when the cow was killed; that he had been an engineer about ten years, and had been on the Rockford, Rock Island & St. Louis Railroad, six or seven months,” was regarded as sufficient to support the finding of the jury on that question, against the defendants. Although the evidence was slight, still it was not an unreasonable presumption, that the engineer was in the employment of the defendants at that time, and that the train on which he was the engineer belonged to them, and was on their road.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Scott county; the Hon. CHARLES D. HODGES, Judge, presiding.

Mr. THOMAS CARTER, Mr. N. M. KNAPP and Mr. W. C. WILKINSON, for the appellant.

Messrs. CHAPMAN & HENDERSON, for the appellee.

Mr. JUSTICE WALKER delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was an action brought by appellee, before a justice of the peace of Scott county, against appellant, to recover the value of a cow killed by an engine and train on appellant's road. It appears the accident occurred within the corporate limits of the town of Winchester, where it is conceded appellant is not bound to fence its track. The animal was killed in day light, and by a freight train.

It is urged that the evidence fails to support the verdict. The evidence is conflicting, and were that introduced by either side considered alone, it would clearly support the respective theories of the parties. Appellee contends that the use of ordinary care and prudence on the part of the employees of the road, would have prevented the injury to the property, and the evidence of his witnesses, uncontradicted, seems to establish that position. On the other side, it is contended that the engineer and brakeman used every precaution in their power to prevent the injury, and they swear they did. One of appellee's...