Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific R. R. v. Austin

Citations

• 69 Ill. 426

Syllabus

<p>1. Death by negligence—instruction as to damages. On the trial of an action nuclei- the statute to recover damages for the killing of a person through negligence, the court instructed the jury, if they believed, from the evidence, that the plaintiff was entitled to recover, they should render a verdict for no more than $5000: Held, that the instruction, in a doubtful case, was calculated to improperly influence the jury to render a verdiet for a large amount.</p> <p>2. So, an instruction that, if the jury believed, from the evidence, Ihe plaintiff should recover, it was proper for them, in finding the damages, to take into consideration the support of the widow and children of the deceased, and the instruction and moral training of the children, and their ages, and the pecuniary condition of the widow and children, where there was no proof tending to show that the deceased was fitted by nature or education, or by disposition, to furnish his children instruction,-or moral, physical or intellectual training, was held to have been improperly given.</p> <p>3. Negligence—stopping train on supposition a party near the track would get on the same. The servants of a railroad company in charge of a moving train are not bound to stop the same because a person ahead is walking near the track and in a line nearly parallel with it, or because a vehicle is seen slowly approaching the track, or standing a few yards from it, for they will have good reason to suppose that the'person so walking or in charge of the vehicle will not attempt to cross until the train has passed; and should such person suddenly get upon the track and get injured or killed in so doing, the fault will not be that of the company or its agents, unless their conduct be so grossly' careless as that the exercise of proper and reasonable caution by the party injured or killed could not have protected him.</p>