Union Railway & Transit Co v. Shacklet

Citations

• 119 Ill. 232
• 10 N.E. 896

Syllabus

<p>1. Negligence—negligence of another contributing to the injury. A railway company will not be excused from the consequences of its own neglilenee, or its liability for an injury caused thereby, from the fact that another company was more culpably negligent than it, thereby contributing to the injury, as, in the case of a collision of trains causing the death of a passenger.</p> <p>2. Parties—representative capacity of the plaintiff—whether it must be proven, and in what way. In an action on the case by one suing as administrator of an estate of a deceased person, against a railway company, to recover for causing the death of the plaintiff’s intestate, unless the representative capacity of the plaintiff is put in issue by plea, it is not necessary to make any proof of his letters of administration, or his appointment, or right to sue in such capacity.</p> <p>3. The appointment of one as administrator of an estate, when that fact is put in issue, may be shown by an examined copy of the record of the appointment, satisfactorily proved, by oral testimony, to be a true copy thereof.</p> <p>4. Action—remedy—ira case of a new right given by statute. Where a statute gives a new right, without providing a special remedy for its enforcement, it may be enforced by any appropriate common law action.</p> <p>5. Appeal—reviewing the facts—for what purpose. AVhereitis claimed there is no evidence of a fact, as, negligence in operating a train of cars, upon which to base an instruction, and the alleged error in giving the instruction depends upon there being no evidence tending to prove the fact, this court will examine the evidence to see if it does prove, or tend to prove, such fact.</p>