delivered the opinion of the court.
Margolis v. Chicago Railways Co., 205 Ill. App. 286 (1917)
April 16, 1917
·
Illinois Appellate Court
·
Gen. No. 22,816
205 Ill. App. 286
Mrs. A. Margolis, Appellee, v. Chicago Railways Company, Appellant.
Gen. No. 22,816.
(Not to he reported in full.)
. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Dennis W. Sullivan, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.
Affirmed.
Opinion filed April 16, 1917.
Statement of the Case.
Action by Mrs. A. Margolis, plaintiff, against the Chicago Railways Company, defendant, to recover damages for injuries to plaintiff’s automobile due to a collision with defendant’s street car. From a judgment for plaintiff for $340.15, defendant appeals. -
*287Abstract of the Decision.
1. Street railroads, § 131 * —when evidence is sufficient to sustain judgment for plaintiff in action for injuries to automobile. In an action against a street car company to recover damages for injuries to plaintiff’s automobile, where the trial was by the court, and it appeared that as the automobile which was being driven south, came to an east and west street and before starting to turn, the driver stopped the car, and, in looking south, saw a northbound car standing in front of the car barns about half a block away and passengers getting on and off, and that she then started to turn east and when the car was partially upon the northbound track she reversed and started back towards the west, and that just then the car struck the front end of the automobile, held that a judgment in favor of the plaintiff was not manifestly against the weight of the evidence.
2. Street railroads, § 97*—when driver of automobile is not negligent in turning at street intersection in front of street car. In an action against a street car company to recover damages for injuries to plaintiff’s automobile, where the trial was by the court, and it appeared that as the automobile which was being driven south came to an east and west street, and, before starting to turn, the driver stopped the car, and, in looking south, saw a northbound car standing in front of the car barns about half a block away and passengers getting on and off, and that she then started to turn east, and when the car was partially upon the northbound track she reversed and started back towards the west, and that just then the car struck the front end of the automobile, held that the trial court could properly conclude that, as the automobile was first at the street intersection, the motorman of the street car should have given the driver time to pass, and that she was justified in proceeding to make the turn without paying further attention to the street car.
William H. Symmes and Frank L. Kriete, for appellant ; J. R. Guilliams and C. C. Cunningham, of counsel.
George D. Wellington and Ernest W. Clark, for appellee.