Travis v. Pierson

Ezra J. Travis v. John Pierson

Travis v. Pierson, 43 Ill. App. 579 (1892)

Court: Appellate Court of Illinois · State Appellate Courts
Decided: January 14, 1892
Judges: Waterman
Citations: 43 Ill. App. 5791891 Ill. App. LEXIS 428

Headnotes

Streets and Alleys—Collisionin Street—Measure of Damages—Evidence. 1. In cases of collision in a street the innocent party is entitled to recover from the wrong-doer what it is reasonably necessary for him to pay, and he does pay, in order to repair the damage done, and also a reasonable sum for the loss of the use of his carriage while he is necessarily deprived thereof. 2. What one has actually paid for repairs is, in the absence of anything to indicate had faith, admissible in evidence to show what the reasonable cost of such repairs is.

Summary

Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Elliott Anthony, Judge, presiding.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Waterman

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Waterman, P. J. This case arose out of a collision between two vehicles on a street in the city of Chicago. We see no sufficient reason for interfering with the conclusion of the court below as to who was to blame for the collision.

In cases of collision the innocent party is entitled to recover from the wrong-doer what it is reasonably necessary for him to pay, and he does pay, in order to repair the damage done, and also a reasonable sum for tide loss of the use of his carriage while he is necessarily deprived of its use. Heard v. Holman, 115 E. C. Law, 1-9; The Atlas, 3 Otto, 302 ; The United States, 3 Wallace, 310; Jolly v. Terre Haute Bridge Co., 6 McLean, 238 ; Williamson et al. v. Barrett et al., 13 Howard (U. S.), 101.

In ordinary business transactions, nothing appearing to cast suspicion on the fairness thereof, good faith is presumed, and evidence of what one has actually paid for necessary repairs is admissible to show what the reasonable cost of such repairs is. Atchison v. Steamboat, 14 Mo. 63 -69; Hildreth v. Fitts, 53 Vt. 684 -690.

The judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 13 cases

View all citing references →

Relies on it most ⓘ

Cloyes v. Plaatje231 Ill. App. 183 (1923)
People v. Tidwell338 N.E.2d 113 (Ill. App. Ct. 1975)
Crossen v. Chicago & Joliet Electric Railway Co.158 Ill. App. 42 (1910)
Mueller v. Yellow Cab Co.442 N.E.2d 595 (Ill. App. Ct. 1982)
Chicago Great Western Railroad v. American McKenna Process Co.200 Ill. App. 166 (1916)
Coyne v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.208 Ill. App. 425 (1917)

Most recent

Mueller v. Yellow Cab Co.442 N.E.2d 595 (Ill. App. Ct. 1982)
People v. Tidwell338 N.E.2d 113 (Ill. App. Ct. 1975)
Sunbeam Beverage Co. v. Cunningham242 Ill. App. 401 (1926)
Cloyes v. Plaatje231 Ill. App. 183 (1923)
Coyne v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.208 Ill. App. 425 (1917)
McDonell v. Lake Erie & Western Railway Co.208 Ill. App. 442 (1917)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

Depth	Case	Cited by
	The "Atlas.", 93 U.S. 302 (1876)	151
	Hildreth v. Fitts, 53 Vt. 684 (1881)	12
	Atchison v. Steam Boat "Dr. Franklin", 14 Mo. 63 (1851)	3

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list