delivered the opinion . of the court.
Walker v. Hilland, 205 Ill. App. 243 (1917)
April 10, 1917
·
Illinois Appellate Court
·
Gen. No. 22,260
205 Ill. App. 243
Sydney Walker, Defendant in Error, v. Charles Hilland, Plaintiff in Error.
Gen. No. 22,260.
(Not to he reported in full.)
Error to the Municipal Court.of Chicago; the Hon, Dennis W. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1916.
Affirmed on remittitur.
Opinion filed April 10, 1917.
Statement of the Case.
Action by Sydney Walker, plaintiff, against Charles Hilland, defendant, to recover damages for injury to plaintiff’s automobile due to a collision with defendant’s, automobile. From a judgment for plaintiff for $298.31, defendant brings error.
*244Abstract of the Decision.
1. Automobiles and garages, § 3*—when evidence sufficient to sustain judgment for plaintiff in action for damages for collision between automobiles. In an action to recover damages for injuries to the plaintiff’s automobile sustained in a collision with an automobile of the defendant, where such collision occurred near a street intersection, and the defendant reached the intersection first and had the right of way in the usual course of driving, and the plaintiff claimed that he was forced to the curb by the defendant’s wrongfully talcing a short cut, held that under the conflicting evidence the judgment in favor of plaintiff should not be disturbed.
2. Appeal and" error, § 1659 * —when judgment sustained upon remittitur. Where in an action for damages for injuries to an automobile the testimony as to damages appeared unsatisfactory, but it also appeared that the court could ascertain from competent evidence what was the reasonable cost of necessary repairs, held that upon remittitur of the amount of certain items, the judgment for plaintiff should be sustained.
J. A. Bloomingston, for plaintiff in error.
Charles B. Obermeyer, for defendant in error.