Little v. Blue Goose Motor Coach Co. case brief summary
178 N.E. 496 (Ill. 1931)
CASE FACTS
Plaintiff challenged the lower court's decision to reverse a recovery under the Injuries Act, in the death of her husband arising out of a motor vehicle accident with defendant. The declaration consisted of two counts. The first was a general charge of negligence, and the second charged that the defendant willfully operated its bus, causing injury to the deceased .Defendant moved to instruct the jury to find defendant not guilty because of another judgment against plaintiff, alleging that the issue of the negligence of plaintiff's husband and that of the driver of the bus was settled and could not be raised in the present suit.
DISCUSSION
The court affirmed the decision below and held that plaintiff could not bring an action for damages because it was based on circumstances under which her husband, were he alive, could not bring an action against the defendant.
CONCLUSION
Judgment affirmed. The finding of the court below that the collision was caused by the negligence of plaintiff's husband necessarily was a finding of fact on a willful negligence count as well as the general negligence count, hence the defendant could not be guilty of willful negligence.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
178 N.E. 496 (Ill. 1931)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Plaintiff appealed a decision from the
Appellate Court for the Fourth District (Illinois), that reversed a
money judgment for the death of plaintiff's husband because defendant
had been successful in a negligence action arising from the same
circumstances which it brought against plaintiff's husband.CASE FACTS
Plaintiff challenged the lower court's decision to reverse a recovery under the Injuries Act, in the death of her husband arising out of a motor vehicle accident with defendant. The declaration consisted of two counts. The first was a general charge of negligence, and the second charged that the defendant willfully operated its bus, causing injury to the deceased .Defendant moved to instruct the jury to find defendant not guilty because of another judgment against plaintiff, alleging that the issue of the negligence of plaintiff's husband and that of the driver of the bus was settled and could not be raised in the present suit.
DISCUSSION
The court affirmed the decision below and held that plaintiff could not bring an action for damages because it was based on circumstances under which her husband, were he alive, could not bring an action against the defendant.
CONCLUSION
Judgment affirmed. The finding of the court below that the collision was caused by the negligence of plaintiff's husband necessarily was a finding of fact on a willful negligence count as well as the general negligence count, hence the defendant could not be guilty of willful negligence.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
No comments:
Post a Comment