Legal Opinion

Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R. R. v. Greenfield

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided May 22, 1894PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Memorandum.—Action for personal injuries. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Kane County; the Hon. Henry B. Willis, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the December term, 1893, and reversed.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Cartwright

Appellee, as administratrix of the estate of her deceased husband, George Greenfield, brought this suit against appellant to recover damages on account of his death, caused by a train of appellant at a street crossing in the city of Sandwich, on the evening of August 6, 1892. The declaration contained four counts. The negligence charged in the first count was the failure to keep a flagman at the crossing to give warning of the approach of the train, as required by an ordinance of the city providing that such flagman should be stationed there between the hours of seven o’clock a. m. and ten…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. DunleavyIllinois Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. JohnsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1882
  3. Calumet Iron & Steel Co. v. MartinIllinois Supreme Court · 1885
  4. Hawk v. Chicago, Burlington & Northern RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1893

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. West Chicago St. R. R. v. ShannonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1903
  2. Chicago General Ry. Co. v. NovaeckAppellate Court of Illinois · 1901
  3. Chicago City Ry. Co. v. MaugerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1903
  4. Chicago Union Traction Co. v. StraudAppellate Court of Illinois · 1904
  5. Economy Light & Power Co. v. HillerIllinois Supreme Court · 1904

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API