Reeves v. Peoria Railway Co.

196 Ill. App. 322
CourtAppellate Court of Illinois
DecidedOctober 20, 1915
DocketGen. No. 6,082
StatusPublished

This text of 196 Ill. App. 322 (Reeves v. Peoria Railway 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
Reeves v. Peoria Railway Co., 196 Ill. App. 322 (Ill. Ct. App. 1915).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Carnes

delivered the opinion of the court.

4. Street railroads, § 131*—when evidence sufficient to sustain finding as to serious injury. In an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by reason of defendant’s negligence while plaintiff was alighting from one of defendant’s street cars, evidence held fairly to prove that plaintiff sustained a serious injury by reason of the accident. 5. Damages, § 114*—when verdict for a woman excessive in action against street railroad for personal injuries. In an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by reason of defendant’s negligence while plaintiff, a woman, was alighting from one of defendant’s street cars, a verdict for plaintiff for $5,000 held excessive to the extent of $2,500, where it appeared that plaintiff suffered serious injury by reason of the accident, but where it also appeared that for the most part the disability resulting therefrom was due to causes other than the accident. 6. Street railroads, § 147*—when instruction as to lade of proof of expense due to accident properly refused. In an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by reason of the negligence of defendant while plaintiff was alighting from one of defendant’s street ears, an instruction that plaintiff had produced no competent evidence that she had paid bills for hospital, medical or surgical services, held properly refused, where there' was evidence tending to show liability and where there was evidence that plaintiff had received such services, although the evidence as to the amount paid therefor was unsatisfactory.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
196 Ill. App. 322, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reeves-v-peoria-railway-co-illappct-1915.