Tracey v. Chicago Railway Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Tracey v. Chicago Railway Co.

185 Ill. App. 125, 1914 Ill. App. LEXIS 983

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedFebruary 3, 1914

DocketGen. No. 18,955

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 185 Ill. App. 125 (Tracey v. Chicago 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

Tracey v. Chicago Railway Co., 185 Ill. App. 125, 1914 Ill. App. LEXIS 983 (Ill. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice Smith

delivered the opinion of the court.

5. Street railroads, § 142*—instruction on facts constituting negligence. Where there was a conflict in the evidence as to the distance of a street car from a wagon at the time the driver of the latter attempted to cross the track, an instruction that: “It is negligence for a motorman in charge of a street car to run said car at such a rate of speed that he cannot stop said car within the distance at which he could, by the exercise of ordinary care on his part, see an obstruction ahead of him on the track,” is erroneous. 6. Street railroads, § 62*—mutual obligations as to use of streets. The driver of a wagon and the employes of a street rail-' way company operating a street car, using the street in common, are bound only to exercise ordinary care to avoid injuring each other.

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

Mr. Presiding Justice Smith

delivered the opinion of the court.

5. Street railroads, § 142*—instruction on facts constituting negligence. Where there was a conflict in the evidence as to the distance of a street car from a wagon at the time the driver of the latter attempted to cross the track, an instruction that: “It is negligence for a motorman in charge of a street car to run said car at such a rate of speed that he cannot stop said car within the distance at which he could, by the exercise of ordinary care on his part, see an obstruction ahead of him on the track,” is erroneous. 6. Street railroads, § 62*—mutual obligations as to use of streets. The driver of a wagon and the employes of a street rail-' way company operating a street car, using the street in common, are bound only to exercise ordinary care to avoid injuring each other.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

185 Ill. App. 125, 1914 Ill. App. LEXIS 983, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tracey-v-chicago-railway-co-illappct-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack