Loftus v. Illinois Midland Coal Co.

193 Ill. App. 454
CourtAppellate Court of Illinois
DecidedApril 16, 1915
StatusPublished

This text of 193 Ill. App. 454 (Loftus v. Illinois Midland Coal 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
Loftus v. Illinois Midland Coal Co., 193 Ill. App. 454 (Ill. Ct. App. 1915).

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Eldredge

delivered the opinion of the.court.

2. Mines and minebals, § 91*—who -within act requiring places of refuge. A mine flagman is within the protection of section 21b of the Mines and Miners’ Act (J. & A. If 7489) relating to places of refuge on haulage roads or gangways in mines, where he was injured by being unable to escape from a car after he had assisted, as it was his duty to do, a driver in replacing it on the rails. 3. Mines and minebals, § 91*—evidence in action for injuries caused by failure to provide places of refuge. In an action for injuries sustained by a miner by reason of the failure of the former to provide places of refuge in a mine as required by section 21b of the Mines and Miners’ Act (J. & A. jf 7489), the defendant is not injured by the admission of evidence that at the time the plaintiff was injured he had gone to' the assistance of a driver in replacing a derailed car, at the direction of an assistant mine boss, where the evidence showed that it was a part of the plaintiff’s duties to do so. 4. Aípeal and ebror, § 1033*—predicating error on matter not shown by record. Error cannot be predicated on the alleged admission of evidence not shown by the abstract on appeal. 5. Mines and minerals, § 187*-—when assumed risk and contributory negligence no defense to action for injuries. An instruction in an action for injuries sustained by a miner by failure of his employer to provide places of refuge in a mine as required by section 21b of the Mines and Miners’ Act (J. & A. f 7489), that neither assumed risk nor contributory negligence was a defense, held not prejudicial to the defendant when such defenses were not made and issued by the pleadings or proof. 6. Damages, § 110*—when damages for injuries to miner not excessive. A verdict for $10,000 for injuries sustained by a miner, held not excessive.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
193 Ill. App. 454, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/loftus-v-illinois-midland-coal-co-illappct-1915.