Trafelet v. Chicago City Railway Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Trafelet v. Chicago City Railway Co.

202 Ill. App. 131, 1916 Ill. App. LEXIS 856

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedNovember 27, 1916

DocketGen. No. 22,392

StatusPublished

This text of 202 Ill. App. 131 (Trafelet v. Chicago City 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

Trafelet v. Chicago City Railway Co., 202 Ill. App. 131, 1916 Ill. App. LEXIS 856 (Ill. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.

4. Street railroads, § 63*—what is effect of stireet obstructions as to duty of motorman. The fact that there are obstructions in a street occasioned by the construction of a building does not operate to change the place of crossing for pedestrians from the crosswalk to the middle of the block, or to impose a duty on the servants of a street car company to anticipate that pedestrians would suddenly cross the street in the middle of the block. 5. Street railroads, § 73*—when failure to sound gong not negligent. No negligence can be imputed to a street car motorman as a matter of law in not sounding the gong or arresting the speed of the car in the middle of the block. 6. Street railroads, § 66*—when duty of motorman discharged after discovery of peril. In an action to recover for personal injuries sustained as a result of being struck by defendant’s street car, where defendant’s motorman was not running at an excessive rate of speed, there can be no liability- where all things possible to be done were done by the motorman to avoid the accident, the environment of the parties considered. 7. Appeal- and error, § 1778*—when Appellate Court m,ay reverse with finding of fact. The Appellate Court on review is not restrained, as is the trial court, from determining the probative force of the evidence, and may reverse a judgment with a finding of fact when in its opinion the evidence fails to sustain such judgment.

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

Mr. Justice Holdom

delivered the opinion of the court.

4. Street railroads, § 63*—what is effect of stireet obstructions as to duty of motorman. The fact that there are obstructions in a street occasioned by the construction of a building does not operate to change the place of crossing for pedestrians from the crosswalk to the middle of the block, or to impose a duty on the servants of a street car company to anticipate that pedestrians would suddenly cross the street in the middle of the block. 5. Street railroads, § 73*—when failure to sound gong not negligent. No negligence can be imputed to a street car motorman as a matter of law in not sounding the gong or arresting the speed of the car in the middle of the block. 6. Street railroads, § 66*—when duty of motorman discharged after discovery of peril. In an action to recover for personal injuries sustained as a result of being struck by defendant’s street car, where defendant’s motorman was not running at an excessive rate of speed, there can be no liability- where all things possible to be done were done by the motorman to avoid the accident, the environment of the parties considered. 7. Appeal- and error, § 1778*—when Appellate Court m,ay reverse with finding of fact. The Appellate Court on review is not restrained, as is the trial court, from determining the probative force of the evidence, and may reverse a judgment with a finding of fact when in its opinion the evidence fails to sustain such judgment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 Ill. App. 131, 1916 Ill. App. LEXIS 856, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trafelet-v-chicago-city-railway-co-illappct-1916.