Jones v. Jones
Citations
- 71 Ill. 562
Syllabus
<p>1. Practice—assigning special causes for new trial. To avail himself of an objection to a verdict on the ground that the damages are exces- . ° sive, a party should, in some way, either by general or special objection, make that a ground for granting a new trial, and if he fails to do so, he must i)e regarded as having had no objections to the amount of the finding, or if he had, that he waived them.</p> <p>3. Trespass—a pwrty who uses more force than is necessary to eject another from, his premises, is a trespasser. When a person directs another t0 leave his house, who refuses, he has the right to use all reasonable and necessary force to compel him to go, but no more than is necessary to effect the end, and if he does use more force than is necessary he becomes a tresPasser «6 initio.</p> <p>3. Instructions—need not he repeated. It was not error to refuse an instruction to the effect that the defendant had a right to use such force in exPeU*n£ plaintiff from his premises as an ordinarily prudent and cauii°ns ™an would have done under the circumstances, when, by another instruction, the jury had been told that the defendant had a right to use such force as was reasonably necessary, as the instruction given, in substance, contained all that was embraced in the one refused, and the court was not required to repeat it.</p> <p>4. Measure op damages in trespass to the person. The plaintiff, in an action of trespass for injury to his person, is entitled to recover such an amount of damages as will compensate him for the injury sustained, and if the acts on the part of the defendant were wanton and wilful, the jury may give punitive damages.</p> <p>5. Punitive damages—what the jury may consider, in awarding. The jury, in awarding punitive damages for a wanton and wilful trespass, may take into consideration the pecuniary circumstances of the defendant, and the age, sex, position in society of the plaintiff', and the injuries received, with all the circumstances in evid
Judges: Walker
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
22 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Coleman v. AllenSupreme Court of Georgia· 1888-02-01· cited 50×
- Griggas v. ClausonAppellate Court of Illinois· 1955-08-29· cited 33×
- Leyenberger v. PaulAppellate Court of Illinois· 1888-03-28· cited 8×
- Wolfstein v. Illinois Power & Light Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois· 1929-04-17· cited 5×
- Graham v. DressenAppellate Court of Illinois· 1937-10-15· cited 5×
- Schwarz v. AdsitAppellate Court of Illinois· 1900-11-08· cited 4×
- J. Obermann Brewing Co. v. OhlerkingAppellate Court of Illinois· 1889-04-17· cited 3×
- McClaren v. City of GillespieAppellate Court of Illinois· 1928-05-02· cited 3×
- Centralia & Chester Railroad v. HenryAppellate Court of Illinois· 1889-06-15· cited 2×
- Calumet Electric Street Railway Co. v. Van PeltAppellate Court of Illinois· 1897-02-01· cited 2×
- Gormully & Jeffery Mfg. Co. v. OlsenAppellate Court of Illinois· 1897-08-05· cited 2×
- Chicago & Grand Trunk Ry. Co. v. KinnareAppellate Court of Illinois· 1898-05-09· cited 2×
- Hearst's Chicago American v. SpissAppellate Court of Illinois· 1901-12-16· cited 2×
- Moore v. Jansen & SchaeferAppellate Court of Illinois· 1932-02-01· cited 1×
- in Re Solid Software Solutions, Inc., D/B/A Edible SoftwareTex. App. Ct., 1st Dist. (Houston)· 2015-03-25
- Indianapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. WillischAppellate Court of Illinois· 1881-04-07
- Bachman v. FriedmanAppellate Court of Illinois· 1893-03-18
- Funk v. MillsAppellate Court of Illinois· 1893-05-24
- Whiteside v. CollierAppellate Court of Illinois· 1902-03-03
- Landt v. McCulloughAppellate Court of Illinois· 1902-10-27
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.