Kronenberger v. Husky

235 N.E.2d 157, 93 Ill. App. 2d 76, 1968 Ill. App. LEXIS 973
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Kronenberger v. Husky. Read the opinion of the Court — 79 Ill. App. 2d 161
Appellate Court of Illinois·Decided March 9, 1968·No. Gen. No. 66-2·Published

Opinion

GOLDENHERSH, J.

This cause was remanded to this court following reversal of the judgment previously entered.1 The facts and issues are stated in our prior opinion 2 and are not here repeated.

The only contentions not considered in our prior opinion are that defendant’s instruction 15 did not follow the IPI form, was confusing, prejudicial to plaintiff, unduly accentuated the application of the statutes to riders of bicycles and would create the impression that the sections quoted therein were applicable only to bicycle riders.

Upon consideration of this instruction in the context of all of the instructions given, we are of the opinion that the jury could not have been misled, nor the plaintiff prejudiced thereby. The judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Clair County is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

EBERSPACHER and MORAN, JJ., concur.

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

Kronenberger v. Husky, 235 N.E.2d 157, 93 Ill. App. 2d 76, 1968 Ill. App. LEXIS 973 (Ill. Ct. App. 1968).

235 N.E.2d 157 (Kronenberger v. Husky) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kronenberger v. Husky
223 N.E.2d 712 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1967)
Kronenberger v. Husky
231 N.E.2d 385 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1967)