Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. Dement

Citations

• 44 Ill. 74

Syllabus

<p>1. New trial—verdict against t7ie evidence. Although the correctness of a verdict may be doubtful, yet if it is not clearly against the evidence, or unsupported by it, the finding will not be disturbed.</p> <p>2. So in an action against a railroad to recover the value of a cow alleged to have been killed by a train, the proof as to the manner in which the cow was killed was, that, when found, she was lying on her back in the railway ditch, between two and three feet from the track, bloated, and the blood oozing from her nose. The jury found she came to her death from a passing train, and the court, though doubtful of the correctness of their finding, refused to disturb it.</p> <p>3. Instructions—omissions therein obviated by the proof. Although the instructions, given in such a case for the plaintiff, omit to state that it must be proved that the road had been operated for six months prior to the accident, yet no harm could result to the defendant for such omission, when it clearly appeared from the evidence that the road had been in use for a much longer period.</p>