Bartholomae & Roesing Brewing & Halting Co. v. Chicago Railways Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Bartholomae & Roesing Brewing & Halting Co. v. Chicago Railways Co.

198 Ill. App. 512, 1916 Ill. App. LEXIS 484

Appellate Court of Illinois·Decided April 12, 1916·No. Gen. No. 21,058·Published

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Pam

delivered the opinion of the court.

4. Tobts, § 34*—when joint tort feasor found guilty estopped to claim that other defendant should have been found guiltj). In an action for negligence where there are two defendants, and the action is tried without a jury, a defendant found guilty is estopped to claim that the court may have erred in not also finding the other defendant guilty, the negligence of such other defendant not excusing negligence on the part of the defendant found guilty.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mr. Presiding Justice Pam

delivered the opinion of the court.

4. Tobts, § 34*—when joint tort feasor found guilty estopped to claim that other defendant should have been found guiltj). In an action for negligence where there are two defendants, and the action is tried without a jury, a defendant found guilty is estopped to claim that the court may have erred in not also finding the other defendant guilty, the negligence of such other defendant not excusing negligence on the part of the defendant found guilty.

Bartholomae & Roesing Brewing & Halting Co. v. Chicago Railways Co., 198 Ill. App. 512, 1916 Ill. App. LEXIS 484 (Ill. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

198 Ill. App. 512 (Bartholomae & Roesing Brewing & Halting Co. v. Chicago Railways Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.