Cline v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.

198 Ill. App. 163, 1916 Ill. App. LEXIS 366
CourtAppellate Court of Illinois
DecidedFebruary 24, 1916
DocketGen. No. 21,189
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 198 Ill. App. 163 (Cline v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cline v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co., 198 Ill. App. 163, 1916 Ill. App. LEXIS 366 (Ill. Ct. App. 1916).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Railroads, § 738*—when driver of automobile truck attempting to cross railroad track guilty of contributory negligence. In' an action for damages caused by collision of a railroad engine with an automobile truck, the law will not tolerate the absurdity of allowing plaintiff to testify that he looked but did not see the train, when the view was unobstructed and where if he had properly exercised his sight he must have seen it. 3. Railroads, § 729*—when negative testimony as to ringing of bell insufficient to overcome positive testimony. In a suit for damages caused by a locomotive colliding with an automobile truck at a highway crossing, and where plaintiff’s automobile truck, according to testimony, made a “terrible noise,” the situation of the occupants of the truck was less favorable for hearing, and their negative evidence is not entitled to more weight than positive evidence as to the fact that a whistle was blown by defendant’s locomotive. 4. Appeal and error, § 1802*—when judgment reversed with finding of fact. Where a verdict is against the weight of evidence on the question of negligence and contributory negligence, the judgment will be reversed with a finding of fact on such questions. 5. Railroads, § 735*—when evidence insufficient to sustain finding that defendant guilty of negligence in failing to ring bell or blow whistle of locomotive. In an action for damages for injury to an automobile truck and goods as a result of a collision at a railroad crossing, evidence held insufficient to sustain a finding that defendant was guilty of negligence in failing to blow the whistle and ring the bell of the locomotive.

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

Related

Wolf v. New York, Chigago & St. Louis Railroad
148 S.W.2d 1032 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1941)
Rucker v. Alton Railroad Co.
123 S.W.2d 24 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1938)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
198 Ill. App. 163, 1916 Ill. App. LEXIS 366, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cline-v-chicago-milwaukee-st-paul-railway-co-illappct-1916.