Court Opinion

ID: 9733231
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 16:59:02.650748+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:26:39.631199
License: Public Domain

CULBERTSON, J., dissents. I cannot agree with the majority opinion. Under the facts in this case this five-year-old infant was placed in a position of danger on a farm tractor with moving parts of the gears exposed. The relationship of the minor plaintiff and the defendant was obviously one for mutual benefit, and it is inconsistent, both with the facts and the law, to conclude that defendant was not required to exercise ordinary care and caution for the safety of the child (Armster v. American Steel Foundries, 313 Ill. App. 378). In the case of Abbs v. Rob Roy Country Club, Inc., 337 Ill. App. 591, the Court, in a comparable case where a minor plaintiff was invited to ride on a platform on a tractor and was thrown off and struck by moving parts of the motors, concluded that it was defendant’s duty to exercise reasonable care for plaintiff’s safety since tbe jury could conclude that at-the time of the accident plaintiff was riding on defendant’s tractor at defendant’s invitation. In the case before us there was obviously a question of negligence which the jury could pass on, and a duty to the infant plaintiff other than simply one calling for freedom from wilful and wanton misconduct. I do not believe that there was any reversible error in the record and that the judgment should have been affirmed.