Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Mehlsack
Citations
- 131 Ill. 61
- 22 N.E. 812
Syllabus
<p>1. Negligence—carriers of passengers—degree of care required, distinguishing between passengers, and strangers or mere trespassers. A common carrier of passengers is not under the same obligation as to care and diligence in guarding against injuries to strangers, and especially to trespassers, that it is in guarding against injuries to passengers. His duty to the latter involves the use of the utmost care and diligence which can be bestowed by human skill and foresight, and is enforced by the highest considerations of public policy. But as to the former, his duty rests merely upon grounds of general humanity and respect •for the rights of others, and requires him to so perform the transportation service as to not wantonly or carelessly be an aggressor toward -third persons, whether such persons are on or off the vehicle.</p> <p>2. If a person, while attempting to obtain a free ride upon a railroad train, without the consent of the company or its agents, receives a personal injury, he can not recover therefor unless the company is guilty of such gross negligence as will amount to willful misconduct.</p> <p>3. Same—an instruction on that subject. On the trial of an action to recover damages of a railway company for a personal injury resulting from negligence not so gross in its character as to be willful, the main controversy was whether the plaintiff was a passenger on the train or a .mere trespasser seeking a ride without paying therefor. The court instructed, that “if the jury believe, from the evidence, that the plaintiff, while in the exercise of ordinary care, and without negligence on his part, was injured by negligence of the defendant, as alleged in the declaration, then the jury should find the defendant guilty, and assess the plaintiff’s damages: ” Held, that the instruction was erroneous, as in effect taking from the jury all consideration of the question whether the plaintiff, at the time of the injury, was attempting to obtain a free ride without the
Judges: Bailey
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.