Chicago & Eastern Railroad v. Holland

Citations

• 122 Ill. 461
• 13 N.E. 145

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidence-—physical examination of plaintiff in suit for personal injuries. In an action against a railway company to recover for personal injuries to the plaintiff, occasioned by negligence, the defendant asked for an order of court that the plaintiff submit to an examination by certain physicians named in the motion, which was overruled. Something over a year later the defendant sent two physicians of its selection to examine as to plaintiff’s physical condition, one of whom had before made a thorough examination, who was not admitted, but the other was, and made an examination. Still later, another of the physicians named in the motion was allowed to make a thorough examination of the plaintiff: Held, that as the •q defendant had the benefit of an examination by three of its physicians, it could not complain of the overruling of its motion.</p> <p>2. Same—statements and declarations—as part of the res gestae. In an action by a party injured by a collision with a railway train, against the railway company operating such train, the plaintiff will have the right to show the position of the defendant’s train, and what precaution, if any, the conductor in charge of the train had taken to guard against danger; and the statements or declarations of the conductor a few moments before the collision, being a part of the res gestee, may be shown for that purpose.</p> <p>3. Same—proving contents of letter on cross-examination. On the trial of a case the defendant laid the foundation for the introduction in evidence of a letter handed to a witness, who identified the letter, and, on his direct examination, stated its contents to the jury. On cross-examination the letter itself was allowed to be given in evidence: Held, no error. If its contents were proper evidence for the defendant, the letter itself was also for the plaintiff.</p> <p>4. Practice—specific objection—when to be made. On the trial of an action to recover damages for a personal injury, the plaintiff proved