Palm v. Rockford City Traction Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Palm v. Rockford City Traction Co.

200 Ill. App. 115

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedFebruary 8, 1916

DocketGen. No. 6,144

StatusPublished

This text of 200 Ill. App. 115 (Palm v. Rockford City Traction 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

Palm v. Rockford City Traction Co., 200 Ill. App. 115 (Ill. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Dibell

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Carriers, § 476*—when evidence sufficient to establish that passenger leaving street car while it was in motion was guilty of contributory negligence. In an action by a street car passenger to recover damages for personal injuries sustained as the result of stepping from the exit door of a pay-as-you-enter car while it was in motion, where it appeared that plaintiff gave the signal to stop and immediately followed two men, one of whom opened the exit door, and either did not hear or disregarded the warning of the conductor not to get off, and the latter was unable to close the door because plaintiff was in the way, evidence held sufficient to establish that plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence.

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

Mr. Presiding Justice Dibell

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Carriers, § 476*—when evidence sufficient to establish that passenger leaving street car while it was in motion was guilty of contributory negligence. In an action by a street car passenger to recover damages for personal injuries sustained as the result of stepping from the exit door of a pay-as-you-enter car while it was in motion, where it appeared that plaintiff gave the signal to stop and immediately followed two men, one of whom opened the exit door, and either did not hear or disregarded the warning of the conductor not to get off, and the latter was unable to close the door because plaintiff was in the way, evidence held sufficient to establish that plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

200 Ill. App. 115, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/palm-v-rockford-city-traction-co-illappct-1916.