Case ID: ill-app_186/html/0292-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Mr. Justice Carnes", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Erneste Wulfe, Appellee, v. American Packing and Provision Company, Appellant.
    Gen. No. 5,873.
    (Hot to fee reported in full.)
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of Kankakee county; the Hon. Chables B. Campbell, Judge, presiding.
    Heard in this court at the October term, 1913.
    Reversed with finding of facts.
    Opinion filed April 15, 1914.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by Erneste Wulfe against American Packing and Provision Company to recover for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff resulting from being attacked by a cow which servants of defendant were driving on a public highway. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff for eight hundred dollars, defendant appeals.
    H. K. & H. H. Wheeler, for appellant.
    Gower, Cooper, Hobbie & Parish, for appellee.
    Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Animals, § 14
      
      —when owner not liable for personal injuries caused by domestic animals. The owner of a domestic animal of a species not inclined to mischief is not liable for injury committed by it to the person of another in the absence of notice to the owner of mischievous tendencies of the animal.
    2. Animals, § 14
      
      —when owner of cow not liable for injury to pedestrian on highway. In an action to recover for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff by being attacked by a cow which servants of defendant were driving on a public highway, the facts showed that the cow while being driven with other cattle lay down and could not he made to go any farther and that plaintiff, a woman, was walking home in the highway and after passing the cow and defendant’s employes the cow got up and ran 'down the road and against her knocking her down. Plaintiff claimed that the servants of defendant were negligent in driving the cow so that it became overheated and vicious and that defendant should have employed competent persons to manage the cow. Held that the evidence was insufficient to show that defendant was negligent and that a verdict and judgment for plaintiff could not be sustained.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice Carnes

delivered the opinion of the court.