Steudle v. Rentchler, 64 Ill. 161 (1872)

June 1872 · Illinois Supreme Court
64 Ill. 161

Bertha Steudle, by her next friend, v. Jacob Rentchler.

Action—injury from horses running away. Where horses driven in a team become frightened and run away, without any carelessness or improper management on the part of the driver, the owner will not he liable in an action to recover for personal injuries received by another in consequence of the accident.

Writ oe Error to the Circuit Court of St. Clair county j the Hon. Joseph Gillespie, Judge, presiding.

This was an action of trespass on the case, brought in the court below in the name of Bertha Steudle, by Regine Steudle, her next friend, against Jacob Rentchler, to recover damages for an injury received by the plaintiff, occasioned by horses of the defendant, which, while driven by bis servant, and through the careless and reckless management,of the latter, as is alleged, became detached from the buggy, and ran away and over the person of the plaintiff.

A trial below resulted in a verdict and judgment in favor of the defendant, and the plaintiff thereupon ‘sued out this writ of error. The principal question is, whether the facts showed a liability on the part of defendant for injury resulting from the accident.

Messrs. G. & G. A. Koerner, for the plaintiff in error.

Mr. W. H. Underwood, for the defendant in error.

Per Curiam:

The verdict and judgment in this case are clearly right, and if there is an error in the instructions, it is no reason for reversal. A different verdict should have been *162set aside by the court. The defendant is in no way responsible for the injury to the plaintiff. Admitting the driver to have been in his employment at the time the horses ran away, there is still nothing upon which to found the action. A boy hit one of the horses with some missile. He began to kick, and frightened the other horse. The driver jumped from the vehicle and seized them by the head. They overpowered him and ran away, and the plaintiff was injured. The evidence shows the driver was considered a good driver. He was guilty of no carelessness, so far as the facts are disclosed by this record.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.