Edwards v. Prest-O-Lite Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Edwards v. Prest-O-Lite Co.

202 Ill. App. 233

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedDecember 18, 1916

DocketGen. No. 22,308

StatusPublished

This text of 202 Ill. App. 233 (Edwards v. Prest-O-Lite 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

Edwards v. Prest-O-Lite Co., 202 Ill. App. 233 (Ill. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. 1. Trial, § 215*—when refusal to direct verdict not erroneous. It is not erroneous for the trial court to refuse to direct a verdict for the defendant where the evidence presents a question for the jury as to the negligence of the defendant. 2. Automobiles and gabages, § 3*—when evidence shows negligent operation of defendant’s auto truck. In an action for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff while repairing his automobile truck in an alley twenty-one feet wide, as the result of the truck’s being struck by the defendant’s automobile truck, which was seven feet wide, evidence held to show that the defendant was negligent in the operation of his truck and that such negligence was the proximate cause of the injury. 3. Appeal and ebbob, § 1420*—when error in trial court will not reverse. When the Appellate Court can see from the record that an error committed by the trial court in progress of the case was a harmless one, or that its injurious effect of a harmless character was obviated, so as not to affect injuriously, in the final judgment, the rights of the party against whom the error was committed, it should not be allowed to work a reversal.

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

Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.

Abstract of the Decision. 1. Trial, § 215*—when refusal to direct verdict not erroneous. It is not erroneous for the trial court to refuse to direct a verdict for the defendant where the evidence presents a question for the jury as to the negligence of the defendant. 2. Automobiles and gabages, § 3*—when evidence shows negligent operation of defendant’s auto truck. In an action for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff while repairing his automobile truck in an alley twenty-one feet wide, as the result of the truck’s being struck by the defendant’s automobile truck, which was seven feet wide, evidence held to show that the defendant was negligent in the operation of his truck and that such negligence was the proximate cause of the injury. 3. Appeal and ebbob, § 1420*—when error in trial court will not reverse. When the Appellate Court can see from the record that an error committed by the trial court in progress of the case was a harmless one, or that its injurious effect of a harmless character was obviated, so as not to affect injuriously, in the final judgment, the rights of the party against whom the error was committed, it should not be allowed to work a reversal.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 Ill. App. 233, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edwards-v-prest-o-lite-co-illappct-1916.