City of Chicago v. Hislop

It is assumed that the verdict in this case was against- the law and the evidence; that the city had used reasonable care, diligence and skill in the construction and oversight of the tunnel, where the injury occurred; and that a new trial should have been granted, on account of new and material evidence, discovered since the trial, which shows negligence on the part of appellee.

The law of the case is simple, and was correctly expounded to the jury in the instructions given, and''of which no complaint is made.

It was admitted, upon the trial, that the footAvay of the tunnel, Avhere the leg of…