Nipper v. Wabash Railroad

Appellate Court of Illinois

Nipper v. Wabash Railroad

187 Ill. App. 353

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedJune 15, 1914

DocketGen. No. 19,162

StatusPublished

This text of 187 Ill. App. 353 (Nipper v. Wabash Railroad) 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

Nipper v. Wabash Railroad, 187 Ill. App. 353 (Ill. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion, of the court.

2. Railroads, § 769*—when instruction not erroneous as assuming facts. The giving of an instruction for plaintiff which simply informed the jury that the plaintiff charges in his declaration that the railroad company operated its trains across a certain public street, held not error for the reason that the jury would infer from the language of the instruction that the court assumed that the crossing was a public crossing. 3. Instructions, §" 90*—when instruction on right of jury to disregard testimony of a witness erroneous. A requested instruction stating that “the jury have no right to disregard the testimony of a witness where such testimony is not contradicted, and such witness has not been impeached,” held bad for the reason that the testimony referred to is not confined to material matters and for the reason that the testimony might be plainly false and impossible of direct contradiction or impeachment.

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

Mr. Justice Scanlan

delivered the opinion, of the court.

2. Railroads, § 769*—when instruction not erroneous as assuming facts. The giving of an instruction for plaintiff which simply informed the jury that the plaintiff charges in his declaration that the railroad company operated its trains across a certain public street, held not error for the reason that the jury would infer from the language of the instruction that the court assumed that the crossing was a public crossing. 3. Instructions, §" 90*—when instruction on right of jury to disregard testimony of a witness erroneous. A requested instruction stating that “the jury have no right to disregard the testimony of a witness where such testimony is not contradicted, and such witness has not been impeached,” held bad for the reason that the testimony referred to is not confined to material matters and for the reason that the testimony might be plainly false and impossible of direct contradiction or impeachment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

187 Ill. App. 353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nipper-v-wabash-railroad-illappct-1914.