The Chicago West Div. Ry. Co. v. Mills
| Decision Date | 30 September 1878 |
| Citation | 1878 WL 10225,91 Ill. 39 |
| Parties | THE CHICAGO WEST DIVISION RAILWAY COMPANYv.PHOEBE R. MILLS. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. JOHN G. ROGERS, Judge, presiding. Mr. F. H. KALES, for the appellant.
Mr. S. K. DOW, for the appellee.
On the 13th of May, 1875, the plaintiff, in company with a friend, (Mrs. Camp,) took passage on one of the defendant's open summer cars, at a point on the southern part of its line, intending to go to a point some short distance south of the northern terminus of its line; but this intention was aban doned upon the coming up of a slight shower of rain, and they remained in the car, (intending to return home by it,) until it had been run to its northern terminus and returned south again as far as the corner of State and Randolph streets, when, the car stopping, the plaintiff and her friend, (Mrs. Camp,) again changed their minds and concluded to leave the car at that point. Mrs. Camp left the car without difficulty, but the plaintiff, while attempting to leave it, was thrown, in consequence of the car being suddenly started forward, with great violence to the ground. The plaintiff received a severe and painful injury, in consequence of the fall, and was put to serious expense for attendance of physician and care in nursing, etc.
The defence interposed was, first, that of not guilty, and secondly, that the plaintiff had released the defendant of all claim for damages growing out of the injury.
The verdict was for the plaintiff, assessing her damages at $7000, upon which, after overruling a motion for a new trial, the court gave judgment, and the case comes here upon the appeal of the defendant.
Under the issue presented by the plea of not guilty, the court, at the instance of the plaintiff, gave, among others, the following instruction:
“The court instructs the jury as a matter of law, that it was the duty of the defendant as a carrier of passengers for hire, to carry such passengers safely, and, upon notice, to stop a car, to give such passengers a reasonable opportunity to alight from their car, stopping a reasonable length of time for that purpose, and if the jury believe, from the evidence and circumstances proven in this case, that the plaintiff was a passenger upon one of the cars of defendant by the consent of defendant, or its agents, as conductor or driver, on or about the 13th day of May, A. D. 1875, and that the defendant stopped said car on State street near Randolph street for the purpose of permitting the plaintiff and other passengers to alight, and that when the plaintiff, if using due care and diligence on her part, was in the act of stepping down and off from said car while the car was standing still, the defendant, by its agents, as driver or conductor, started the said car before the plaintiff had had a reasonable time to alight from said car and while she was alighting from said car, which said starting of the car, without negligence or default of plaintiff, caused the plaintiff to be thrown down and injured by breaking her bones, and that the neck of the femur, commonly called the thigh bone, was broken or injured without any negligence or carelessness on the part of the plaintiff, then the railroad company was guilty of such negligence as would make the defendant company liable, and the verdict should be for the plaintiff, unless the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Parkinson v. Mills
... ... 32 C ... J., sec. 616; West v. West, 90 Ala. 458; Dixon ... v. Cardozo, 106 Cal. 506, 39 P. 857; Riggs v ... Zaleski, ... ...
-
Arasmith v. Temple
...not in the case: Drohn v. Brewer, 77 Ill. 280; Callahan v. Myers, 89 Ill. 566; C. M. & St. P. R. R. Co. v. Hall, 90 Ill. 42; C. W. D. Ry. Co. v. Mills, 91 Ill. 39; Ewing v. Runkle, 20 Ill. 464; Fame Ins. Co. v. Morse, 4 Bradwell, 485; Freeport v. Isbell, 83 Ill. 440; Martin v. Johnson, 89 I......
-
Lindberg v. Mut. Nat. Bank of Chicago
...it is otherwise if it took place afterwards.” That rule was again stated in Titcomb v. Vantyle, 84 Ill. 371 and again in Chicago W. D. Ry. Co. v. Mills, 91 Ill. 39;Langdon v. People, 133 Ill. 382-404, 24 N.E. 874;Kelly v. Nusbaum, 244 Ill. 158, 91 N.E. 72;McGregor v. Keun, 330 Ill. 106-114,......
-
Root v. Des Moines City Ry. Co.
... ... end, to be ready to get off on reaching the west side, but ... that it was going too fast for her to do so; that its speed ... as a signal to move on. In Railway Co. v. Mills, 91 ... Ill. 39, it did not appear that the stop was at the usual ... ...