Legal Opinion

Clay v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R. R. Co.

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided December 13, 1894PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Memorandum.—Action for personal injuries. In the Circuit Court of La Salle Comity; the Hon. Charles Blanchard, Judge, presiding. Declaration in case; plea, not guilty; verdict for the defendant by direction of the court; appeal by plaintiff. Heard in this court at the May term, 1894,

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Cartwright

Appellant brought this suit against appellee to recover damage for the loss of his leg, which was cut off above the ankle by an engine being started while he ivas engaged as an employe of appellee under the engine, cleaning the ashes out of the ash pan into the ash pit. At the conclusion of the evidence for plaintiff the court directed a verdict for defendant which was returned by the jury, and judgment was entered accordingly. . The grounds alleged, and upon Avhich it Avas sought to charge the defendant Avith plaintiff’s injury, were that the ash pan was not deep enough for safety, and for…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Chicago & Alton Railroad v. MayIllinois Supreme Court · 1883
  2. Chicago Anderson Pressed Brick Co. v. SobkowiakIllinois Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Stafford v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1885
  4. Chicago Anderson Pressed Brick Co. v. SobkowiakAppellate Court of Illinois · 1892

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Fogarty v. St. Louis Transfer Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1904
  2. Illinois Central Railroad v. SwisherAppellate Court of Illinois · 1895
  3. Illinois Central Railroad v. MeyerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1896

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API