#### Joseph Marks, Plaintiff in Error, v. Chicago City Railway Company and Chicago Railways Company, Defendants in Error.

Gen. No. 22,247.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Charles N. Goodnow, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed December 18, 1916.

Rehearing denied December 29, 1916.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Joseph Marks, plaintiff, against the Chicago City Railway Company and Chicago Railways Company, defendants, to recover damages for personal injuries as the result of being struck by a street car of the defendant Chicago City Railway Company. From a judgment for defendants upon a directed verdict, plaintiff brings error.

Sass & Hood, for plaintiff in error.

Warren D. Bartholomew and Frank L. Kriete, for defendants in error; W. W. Gurley and J. R. Guilliams, of counsel.

Abstract of the Decision.

1. Street railroads, § 100 * —when person working near track not guilty of contributory negligence. One who is standing at the side of a wagon near a street car track with his back towards an approaching street car and is engaged with another person in tying on the load, and does not look to see whether a car is approaching and does not have any notice of the approach of the car by the ringing of the bell, or otherwise, until warned by his coemployee, is not guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Justice Dever

delivered the opinion of the court.

*2212. Stbebt batlboads, § 133 * —when negligence in operation is question for jury. It is a question for the jury whether a street railroad company is guilty of negligence in the operation of its car resulting in the striking of a person who is standing at the side of the wagon near the track with his back towards the approaching car and is engaged with another person in tying on the load, where it appears that the accident occurred near a street intersection, that the car was moving fast at the time such person was struck and that the day was clear; that there were no obstructions that in any way limited the power and opportunity of the motorman to see such person where he was engaged at his work about the wagon, and that no bell was rung or warning given by the motorman or other persons in charge of the car of its approach to such street intersection.