Wabash Railway Co. v. Elliott

98 Ill. 481, 1881 Ill. LEXIS 279
Illinois Supreme Court·Decided May 13, 1881·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice Dickey

delivered the opinion of the Court:

As to the weight of the evidence relating to the allegation of facts, the judgment of the Appellate Court is conclusive. As to the instruction asked by the appellant, and which the circuit court refused to give, we think the decision was right.

It is not the office of the circuit court to determine what circumstances will be sufficient to charge a plaintiff with want of ordinary care, or such want of care as will cut off a right of recovery. The law of this case required of the plaintiff that lie should use ordinary care, considering his surroundings,—that is, such care as men of ordinary prudence would usually exercise under the same or like circumstances. By asking this instruction the court was called upon to usurp the province of the jury, and direct them, in substance, as to what circumstances would show or constitute a want of ordinary care.

Finding no error, the judgment of the Appellate Court in this case is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Wabash Railway Co. v. Elliott, 98 Ill. 481, 1881 Ill. LEXIS 279 (Ill. 1881).

98 Ill. 481 (Wabash Railway Co. v. Elliott) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

City of Chicago v. McLean
8 L.R.A. 765 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1890)
Terre Haute & Indianapolis Railroad v. Voelker
31 Ill. App. 314 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1889)
Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Hall
87 Ala. 708 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1888)
Chicago & Alton Railroad v. Adler
28 Ill. App. 102 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1888)
Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co. v. Mahaffee
16 Ill. App. 290 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1885)
Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. Moranda
108 Ill. 576 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1884)