City of Joliet v. Weston

14 N.E. 665, 123 Ill. 641
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 19, 1888
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 14 N.E. 665 (City of Joliet v. Weston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
City of Joliet v. Weston, 14 N.E. 665, 123 Ill. 641 (Ill. 1888).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Scott

delivered the opinion of the Court:

. The plaintiff in this case, Frederick Weston, as he was walking with a friend on one of the principal streets of the city of Joliet, carrying his little child in his arms, tripped and fell. By the fall the child, was so fatally injured it died in a few moments after the accident. The alleged cause of the accident was a defective condition of the sidewalk. The plaintiff, as administrator of his deceased child, brought this suit against the city of Joliet, to recover damages resulting to the next of kin on account of the death of the intestate. On the trial in the circuit court plaintiff recovered a judgment. That judgment was affirmed in the Appellate Court for the Second District, and the city asked for and was allowed an appeal to this court.

The attention of this court is directed to but one question,— that is, the damages found are excessive. That is a question that is not subject to review in this court. The rule for ascertaining the damages in any case, is, of course, a question of law, but the amount of the damages, as the same appears from the evidence, is a question of fact. No complaint is made, the court misdirected the jury as to the rules of law they should observe in ascertaining the damages the next of kin of the intestate had sustained, and which plaintiff was entitled to recover for them. It has been so often decided by this court, the amount of the damages sustained by the plaintiff in an action at law is a question of fact, not open to reconsideration in this court, under the statute, the question need not be discussed. It is enough to refer to the many cases in this court on that subject.

The judgment of the Appellate Court will be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Courtney v. Apple
76 N.W.2d 80 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1956)
Hampton v. United States
121 F. Supp. 303 (D. Nevada, 1954)
Hord v. National Homeopathic Hospital
102 F. Supp. 792 (District of Columbia, 1952)
Jones v. Sanitary District
265 Ill. 98 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1914)
Sands v. Potter
46 N.E. 282 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1896)
Turner v. Norfolk & W. R.
22 S.E. 83 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1895)
Terre Haute & Indianapolis R. R. v. Eggmann
58 Ill. App. 21 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1895)
City of Salem v. Harvey
21 N.E. 1076 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1889)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
14 N.E. 665, 123 Ill. 641, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-joliet-v-weston-ill-1888.