The Ill. Cent. R.R. Co. v. Parks

• Decision Date: 31 January 1878
• Citation: 1878 WL 9885,88 Ill. 373
• Parties: THE ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANYv.ANNIE M. PARKS.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

88 Ill. 373

1878 WL 9885 (Ill.)

THE ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY

v.ANNIE M. PARKS.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

January Term, 1878.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of De Witt county; the Hon. LYMAN LACEY, Judge, presiding.

Mr. A. J. GALLAGHER, and Messrs. MOORE & WARNER, for the appellant.

Messrs. DONAHUE & KELLY, and Messrs. WELDON & HUGHES, for the appellee.

Mr. JUSTICE DICKEY delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was an action, brought by Mrs. Parks, against the Illinois Central Railroad Company, to recover damages for an injury alleged to have been received by the plaintiff through the carelessness of defendant's servants. Plaintiff was a passenger traveling north in a passenger train of defendant early in the month of September, 1873, and arrived at Wapello in the morning by six o'clock. She was traveling in the sleeping car. When the train arrived at the station of Wapello, in moving up to the station, the engine by which the train was drawn came in collision with another engine upon the track with such violence that the brake-beam of one engine and the iron rods on the front of the other engine were broken. At the time of the collision plaintiff was standing in the wash room combing her hair, both of her hands being raised to her head. By the collision she was thrown suddenly against the door, striking against the knob, and fell to the floor with an exclamation. She was immediately carried to a sofa by the porter and brakeman, and seemed so seriously injured that a local physician was immediately sent for. She remained in the sleeping car until that afternoon. The railroad surgeon living at Amboy was sent for and arrived that afternoon. In charge of this surgeon she was taken in the sleeping car that evening to Mendota, where she lay some three or four weeks under the care of the surgeon of the railroad company. She went thence to Iowa to the house of a friend, and afterwards to her father's residence in Albany, New York. It is claimed by plaintiff that her spine was injured by the collision or fall, and that to such a degree that she was rendered incapable of effective labor, either physical or mental, and that the injury is permanent.

The defendant insists that her spine was not injured, that the injury was temporary, and that the symptoms, indicating serious injury, exhibited by plaintiff from time to time, were feigned. She was a lady of education, and by profession a teacher. The cause was tried by a jury in March, 1875, and a verdict rendered for the plaintiff for $8958, on which judgment was rendered, and the defendant appeals to this court.

It is insisted by appellant that the damages, in view of the evidence, are excessive to such a degree that the verdict should have been set aside, and that the court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial in that regard.

The testimony is very voluminous, and, as to many of the details in the history of her case, is very contradictory. It is not seriously denied that the plaintiff had a cause of action. From the testimony of defendant's own witnesses it is apparent that the collision was the result of gross carelessness, and that the plaintiff was injured thereby. The contradictions in the testimony all relate merely to the degree of the injury and as to whether it is of a permanent character. It...