North American Provision Co. v. Hart

Appellate Court of Illinois

North American Provision Co. v. Hart

66 Ill. App. 659, 1896 Ill. App. LEXIS 773

DecidedNovember 30, 1896

StatusPublished

This text of 66 Ill. App. 659 (North American Provision Co. v. Hart) 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

North American Provision Co. v. Hart, 66 Ill. App. 659, 1896 Ill. App. LEXIS 773 (Ill. Ct. App. 1896).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Gary

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The appellant had a warehouse in which meat was stored, and the appellee went there properly, to inspect some meat; but instead of going to any entrance used for persons to go in. or which the appellant in any way proffered as such an entrance, he went to a gate about seven feet high, and twelve to fifteen feet long, which was off its hinges, and probably not very securely fastened on the end to which the hinges belonged, and on the other end fastened by a hook into a staple, and either by putting his hand through a hole, lifting the hook and pulling the gate—as he says—or by attempting to climb the gate—as all witnesses of the accident say—the gate fell upon him and inflicted the injury for which he sues.

On either version, the injury was the result of his own carelessness, and he has no right to recover.

The judgment is reversed.

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

Mr. Justice Gary

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The appellant had a warehouse in which meat was stored, and the appellee went there properly, to inspect some meat; but instead of going to any entrance used for persons to go in. or which the appellant in any way proffered as such an entrance, he went to a gate about seven feet high, and twelve to fifteen feet long, which was off its hinges, and probably not very securely fastened on the end to which the hinges belonged, and on the other end fastened by a hook into a staple, and either by putting his hand through a hole, lifting the hook and pulling the gate—as he says—or by attempting to climb the gate—as all witnesses of the accident say—the gate fell upon him and inflicted the injury for which he sues.

On either version, the injury was the result of his own carelessness, and he has no right to recover.

The judgment is reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

66 Ill. App. 659, 1896 Ill. App. LEXIS 773, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/north-american-provision-co-v-hart-illappct-1896.