City of Chicago v. Elzeman

Citations

• 71 Ill. 131

Syllabus

<p>1. Damages excessive—personal injury from negligence. Where a party, 58 years of age, received a fall in consequence of a defective sidewalk, inflicting a severe injury in the shoulder, and also a rupture from, which he suffered great pain, and at the trial, about 13 months after the accident, he was still suffering pain, and was unable to lift his arm, and it appeared that he was a painter by trade, earning at the time of the injury $3 per day, but since had not been able to work, it was held, that a verdict of §3000, in a suit against the city, was not excessive damages.</p> <p>2. Evidence—relevancy. In an action on the case, against a city, to recover damages for an injury from a fall occasioned by a defective side•walk, the city offered to prove the number of miles of sidewalk within the city, which the court refused to allow. The city, however, proved the number of miles of streets in the city: Held, that there was no error in rejecting the proposed evidence, as it could have no important bearing on the issue.</p>