Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Hale

Citations

• 83 Ill. 360

Syllabus

<p>1. Measure oe damages—suit against carrier for injury to a jack. In an action against a carrier for an injury to a jack while b.eing shipped to the owner, no recovery can be had for loss of profits to be derived from letting him to mares, when it is not averred in the declaration and proved, that the carrier was informed of the intended use of the animal.</p> <p>2. It can not be said that a loss of profits is sustained in being prevented from putting a jack to mares, where there is no proof of any outstanding contracts for his services.</p> <p>3. New trial—presumption as to effect of improper evidence and instructions. In an action for an injury to a jack, the proof was conflicting as to the damage to the animal, the highest showing §200. The court improperly admitted evidence of loss of prospective profits to be derived by standing him, and instructed the jury that they might consider such evidence in making their verdict, and the jury assessed the damages at §200: Held, that as it was impossible to say from what data the estimate of damages was made, a new trial should be granted.</p>