Chicago, St. Louis & Pittsburg Railroad v. Gross

Citations

• 133 Ill. 37
• 24 N.E. 563

Syllabus

<p>1. Practice—directing what the verdict shall be. Where there is evidence sufficient for the consideration of the jury in an action against a railway company to recover for a personal injury resulting from negligence, it will not be error for the court to refuse to exclude it from the jury on defendant’s motion, and instruct them to find for the defendant.</p> <p>2. Appeal from Appellate Court—presumption in support of the action of that court. On affirmance of the judgment of the trial court by the Appellate Court, it will be presumed that the latter court did decide that the verdict was not against the law of the case and the instructions of the court.</p> <p>3. So where there is no right of review of the decision of the Appellate Court, the decision of that court as to how much and what investigation was required in a particular case, must necessarily rest in the court itself. When it has decided, it will be presumed it has done all that is required in order to decide correctly, and this can not be rebutted.</p>