City of Elgin v. Renwick

Citations

• 86 Ill. 498

Syllabus

<p>1. Negligence—of plaintiff in stepping into hole in sidewalk. Where a plaintiff, after dark, while walking along a sidewalk pretty fast, was thrown down by stepping into a hole in the walk, and received personal injury, having no knowledge of the defective walk and not seeing the hole, and he testifying that he supposed he was exercising ordinary care, and there being no witness intimating that there was a want of due care on his part, it was held, that a verdict in favor of the plaintiff could not be disturbed on the ground of a want of proper care on his part.</p> <p>2. Practice—testimony during argument. After the testimony in a case has been closed and the argument begun, it is a matter of discretion with the court whether to open the case and receive further evidence, and its refusal can not be assigned for error.</p> <p>3. New trial—newly discovered evidence. The court is justified in refusing a new trial for newly discovered evidence which is merely cumulative.</p> <p>4. Damages—whether excessive—personal injury. In an action against a city to recover for personal injury caused by a defective sidewalk, resulting in paralysis and hernia, with a probability of tie injury being permanent, a verdict of $3,000 damages in favor of the plaintiff was not regarded so large as to justify disturbing the verdict.</p>