Skip to main content
· 5/16/1889

Hodges v. Bearse

Citations

  • 129 Ill. 87
  • 21 N.E. 613

Syllabus

<p>1. Appeals—reviewing the facts. In an action on the case for a personal injury resulting from alleged negligence, if there is evidence tending to support the verdict of the jury, the propriety of their finding is not open to consideration in this court.</p> <p>2. Evidence—to rebut negligence—no previous accident had happened. In an action for a personal injury from negligence in the construction and operating of an elevator in a building, and in failing to employ a competent person to manage and operate the same, the defendant offered to prove that no accident of any kind had happened to the elevator, previous to the one in question, during the four and a half years it had been in use, which the court refused to allow: Held, that the •evidence was properly excluded, as it did not tend to rebut the evidence •of negligence in the particular instance.</p> <p>3. Pbactice—directing what the verdict shall be. Where there is •evidence tending to prove the plaintiff’s case, or sufficient to present a proper case to the jury, an instruction to find for the defendant will be jproperly refused.</p>

Judges: Bailey

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.