Toledo, Wabash & Western Railway Co. v. Durkin

Citations

• 76 Ill. 395

Syllabus

<p>1. Master and servant—respondeat, superior—negligence of fellow-servant. It has been uniformly held by this court, as by the English courts, that the doctrine of respondeat superior does not extend to the case of an injury received by one servant through the carelessness or negligence of another, while both are engaged in the business of the principal, if the latter has taken proper care to engage competent servants to perform the duties assigned them.</p> <p>2. N egligence—servant of railroad corporation assumes the r isles incident to his employment. When a person enters into the service of a railroad company, he thereby undertakes to run all the ordinary risks incident to the employment, including his own negligence or unskillfulness and that of his fellow-servants engaged in the same line of duty, or incident thereto, provided such other servants are competent to discharge the duties assigned them.</p> <p>3. Same—ringing hell, etc. Where the omission to ring a bell or sound a whistle at a road crossing appears not to have contributed in the slightest degree to an injury or accident on a train of cars, the railroad company operating the same will not be subjected to liability in a civil suit for damages in consequence of such omission.</p> <p>4. Practice in Supreme Court—remanding. Where a judgment was reversed, and it appeared, from the agreed statement of facts, that no recovery could be had, the cause was not remanded, but the costs, both in this and the court below, were ordered to be taxed against the appellee, who'was also the plaintiff below.</p>