Gen. No. 21,783.
(Not to be reported in full.)
Abstract of the Decision.
1. Telegraphs and telephones, § 37 * — when evidence sustains verdict in action for negligence in transmission of telegram. In an action to recover damages for negligence in the transmission of a telegram, evidence held to support a verdict for plaintiff.
2. Telegraphs and telephones, § 31* — when evidence shows that damages were direct result of negligence in transmission of telegram. In an action to recover damages for negligence in transmitting a telegram, evidence held sufficient to show that the amount of the verdict for plaintiff was for the damages which he had suffered as a direct result of defendant’s negligence, and that such damages were of the sort which might reasonably have been sup*30posed to have been in the contemplation of the sender of the message and the telegraph company at the time the message was sent.
*29Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Patrick B. Flanagan, Judge, presiding. Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1915.
Affirmed.
Opinion filed June 27, 1917.
Rehearing denied July -13, 1917.
Statement of the Case.
Action by Walter Neslce, plaintiff, against the Western Union Telegraph Company, a corporation, defendant, to recover damages alleged to have been caused by negligence in transmitting a telegram. To reverse a judgment for plaintiff for $53.50, defendant prosecutes this writ of error.
West & Eckhart, for plaintiff in error.
Joseph R. Burres, for defendant in error.
Mr. Presiding Justice Goodwin
delivered the opinion of the court.
*303. Telegraphs and telephones, § 37* — when contributory negligence of plaintiff sending telegram not shown. In an action to recover for damages caused by the negligent transmission of a telegram, evidence held not to show contributory negligence of plaintiff.