Toledo, Peoria & Warsaw Railway Co. v. Webster

Illinois Supreme Court September 15, 1870

Toledo, Peoria & Warsaw Railway Co. v. Webster, 55 Ill. 338 (Ill. 1870)

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam :

On the authority of the case of C. & R. I. R. R. Co. v. Morris, 26 Ill. 402, the objection of a want of venue can not be taken advantage of after verdict. The proof insisted on by appellants was not material. The evidence sustains the verdict, and the judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.*

The cases of Toledo, Peoria & Warsaw Railway Company v. John C. Fry, Same v. David D. Tullis and Same v. David Eastburn, rest on the same point as the preceding case, and the same judgment of affirmance is rendered.

Reference

Full Case Name: Toledo, Peoria & Warsaw Railway Company v. Frank Webster
Status: Published
Syllabus: 1. Pleading—objection to declaration after verdict. It has been held, that in an action against a railroad company to recover for injury resulting from the wrongful act, neglect or default of the company, the insufficiency of the declaration, in that it is not averred the railroad owned by the defendants and used by them, was used in the county and State in which the action was brought, can not be taken advantage of after verdict. 2. Venue—in an action against a railroad company. So in an action against a railroad company for injury to stock, it was held, upon a motion for a new trial and in arrest of judgment, it was not material that the plaintiff, in order to maintain his action, should have proven affirmatively the injury was done within the jurisdiction of the court.