Richard v. Brunner Foundry & Machinery Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Richard v. Brunner Foundry & Machinery Co.

203 Ill. App. 514

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedOctober 12, 1916

DocketGen. No. 6,183

StatusPublished

This text of 203 Ill. App. 514 (Richard v. Brunner Foundry & Machinery 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

Richard v. Brunner Foundry & Machinery Co., 203 Ill. App. 514 (Ill. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Niehaus

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Damages, § 186*—when evidence as to possible results of injury is inadmissible. Evidence as to possible results of plaintiff’s injury to his right eye and its possible effect on his other eye, held incompetent and properly excluded in an action to recover damages for such injury. 3. Damages, § 244*—when admission of improper evidence is harmless error. In an action for damages for personal injuries, held that the improper admission of evidence as to the possible results of the injury was harmless error where there was nothing to show that the jury considered or were influenced by such evidence in finding for the plaintiff.

Cashes, J., dissenting.

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

Mr. Presiding Justice Niehaus

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Damages, § 186*—when evidence as to possible results of injury is inadmissible. Evidence as to possible results of plaintiff’s injury to his right eye and its possible effect on his other eye, held incompetent and properly excluded in an action to recover damages for such injury. 3. Damages, § 244*—when admission of improper evidence is harmless error. In an action for damages for personal injuries, held that the improper admission of evidence as to the possible results of the injury was harmless error where there was nothing to show that the jury considered or were influenced by such evidence in finding for the plaintiff.

Cashes, J., dissenting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

203 Ill. App. 514, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richard-v-brunner-foundry-machinery-co-illappct-1916.