Indianapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. Morgenstern

Citations

• 106 Ill. 216
• 1883 Ill. LEXIS 162

Syllabus

<p>1. Appeals—reviewing questions of fact. In an action on the case against a railway company to recover compensation for the death of an employé of the company, alleged to have been caused by negligence, in which a recovery is had, and the judgment is affirmed by the Appellate Court, this court is precluded from considering whether the verdict is sustained by the evidence, and from examining any of the controverted questions of fact.</p> <p>2. Law and pact—as to negligence—and who are fellow servants. The definition of negligence is a question of law, but it is a question of fact whether a particular case falls within that definition; and the same rule may be applied to the question of who are fellow servants of the same master. as to whether negligence in fact is shown, and whether the party killed thereby was a fellow servant, and received the injury from another servant of the same master in the same line of duty, bringing them often together, cooperating in the same work, this court is precluded from determining.</p> <p>3. Practice—demurrer waived by pleading over. If a defendant, after his demurrer to the declaration is overruled, pleads to the merits, he abandons his demurrer and admits the sufficiency of the declaration, and can not assign for error the decision on the demurrer.</p>