Chicago & Great Eastern Railway Co. v. Fox

Citations

• 41 Ill. 106

Syllabus

<p>1. Instructions — must he based on the evidence. It is error to give instructions when there is no evidence on which to base them.</p> <p>2. New trial — verdict against the evidence. When there is no evidence to support a verdict, a new trial will be granted.</p> <p>3. Agency—party dealing with another as agent of a third person, must know his authority. An agent of a railway company applied to the owner of a dredging and pile driving machine, for an estimate of the cost of certain work the company proposed to have done. The owner of the machine said he would send Mm a proposition, and did, soon after, send a proposition in writing to the agent of the company, stating the terms upon wMch the machine could be had. To this proposition no reply was made, but, in about two weeks thereafter, a tMrd person came to the owner of the machine, representing, as the latter alleges, that he came on behalf of the company, and procured tho machine and crew belonging thereto, to be sent to do the work spoken of. In point of fact the person who obtained the machine was not an agent of the company but a contractor who had engaged to do the work for the company. It was held, the company was not liable to the owner of the machine for the work done therewith; it was Ms fault that he did not ascertain who was to be responsible.</p>