Bulleri v. Chicago Transit Authority

Judgment was entered against defendant on a jury verdict for $25,000 in a- suit for personal injuries. The primary point raised on defendant’s appeal is that the closing argument to the jury by plaintiff’s attorney was so- improper and prejudicial as to require a new trial.

A contention of this character cannot be considered in the abstract, but only in relation to the situation as it existed in the trial when the argument was made. "We shall, therefore, refer briefly to the evidence.

Plaintiff * was the sole occurrence witness on her own behalf. She testified that at about 1:00 a. m. she…