Slaton v Chicago Abstract of Record
Public Court Documents
February 25, 1954

52 pages
Cite this item
-
Brief Collection, LDF Court Filings. Slaton v Chicago Abstract of Record, 1954. 7f8833af-c49a-ee11-be37-00224827e97b. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/986080fa-8c4f-405e-927b-952843d11991/slaton-v-chicago-abstract-of-record. Accessed April 19, 2025.
Copied!
No. 46377 IN THE appellate Court of Illinois F irst D istrict J u n e T e r m , A.D. 1954 WILBERT K. SLATON, A Appellant, VS. Appeal from Circuit Court, Cook County. CITY OF CHICAGO, a municipal cor poration, Appellee. > Honorable John T. Dempsey, Trial Judge. Abstract of Record F leetw ood M. MoCoy, 35 So. Dearborn Street, Chicago 3, Illinois, M oore, M in g & L e ig h to n , 123 W. Madison Street, Chicago 3, Illinois, Attorneys for Appellant. F leetw ood M. M cCoy, W il l ia m R . M in g , J r ., G eorge N. L e ig h t o n , and W alter K. B l a c k , Of Counsel. The Scheffer Press, Inc.— ANdoyer 3-6850 INDEX Page Appeal, Notice o f . .................. 10 Answer of City of Chicago to Amended Com plaint .................................................. 6 Certificate of Clerk to Transcript of Record 48 Certificate of Trial Judge to Report of Pro ceedings ............................................................. 48 Certificate as to all the Evidence...................... 48 Complaint, Original ........................................... 1 Complaint, Amended.................. 1 Directed Verdict, Motions and Instructions for, given......................................... 46 Evidence (See witnesses and exhibits below) Plaintiff’s ............................................. ... Instruction given for Defendant. . ................... 46 Jury demand.......................................................... 1 Motion for Directed Verdict............................... 45 New Trial, Motion for........................................... 46 Notice of Intent to Sue City of Chicago . . . . . 5 Order - Striking Original Complaint ................. 1 Granting Leave to Substitute Attorneys . . 7 Granting Leave to File Amended Com plaint .................... 1 Assigning Cause to Judge Dempsey............. 7 Overruling and Denying Motion for a New Trial ................................................................ 9 Petition in support of Motion to Strike Ori ginal Complaint................................................. 1 Praecipe for Transcript of Record . . . . . . 10 Praecipe, Amended, for Transcript of Re cord ................................................... 11 Proof of Service of Notice of Appeal................ 10 Proof of Service of Praecipe for Record . . . 10 Proof of Service of Amended Praecipe for R ecord .............. 11 Page Stipulation - Report of Proceedings............ ... 11 Verdict....................................... ............................. 46 WITNESSES Plaintiff’ s - Wilbert K. Slaton - Direct Examination..................... 11 Cross-Examination............................. 19 Nathaniel Gray - Direct Examination. .................................. 21 Cross-Examination. .................................. 24 John Gray - Direct Examination................. 25 Cross-Examination............................... 27 Elsie Gray - Direct Examination............................. 29 Cross-Examination............................... 30 Mrs. Walter R. Sassman - Direct Examination. ................................. 31 Cross-Examination...................... 34 Ellsworth Eugene Hasbrouck - Direct Examination.................. 36 Cross-Examination. . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 EXHIBITS Plaintiff’s - No. 1 -Notice of Intent to Sue City of Chica go . . . . . . .................. 27 No. 2-X-R ay Film of Wilbert K. Slaton. . . 43 No. 3-X-R ay Film of Wilbert K. Slaton. . . 43 No. 4-X-R ay Film of Wilbert K. Slaton. . . 43 No. 5-X-Ray Film of Wilbert K. Slaton. . . 43 ii A P P E L L A T E C O U R T OF I L L I N O I S F ir st D istrict J u n e T e r m , A.D. 19M WILBERT K. SLATON, Plaintiff, vs. Honorable John T. Dempsey, J Trial Judge. ABSTRACT OF RECORD Page of Record 1 Piacita, 2-7 Original complaint, filed August 4, 1948 (which has been superseded by amended com plaint.) 8-9 Jury demand, filed August 4, 1948. 10-11 Petition in support of motion to strike com plaint filed September 7, 1948. 12-13 Order, entered June 17, 1949, sustaining motion of defendant to strike complaint and granting leave to plaintiff to file amended complaint in fifteen days and to defendant to file an answer fifteen days thereafter. 14-18 Amended complaint, filed the 21st day of June, 1949, as follows: (Omitting caption and title of Court and cause and form at com mencement): — 2 - 15 1. That on the 14th day of August, A. D„ 1947, the defendant was a Municipal Corpor ation, and as such was in the possession and control of public streets and highways in the City of Chicago. 2. That to-wit on the day aforesaid, a col lection of individuals consisting of a mob of more than twelve persons, assembled at said intersection of 103rd Street and South Halsted Street, public highways in the said city and up and down both streets near said intersection in the City of Chicago, County of Cook and State of Illinois, for the purpose of exercising correctional and regulative powers over the plaintiff by violence and without lawful au thority; that plaintiff was lawfully in his auto mobile driving the same in an Easterly direc tion on said 103rd Street and turned his auto mobile North on South Halsted, and was then and there and all the while using and in the use of all due care and caution for his own safety and the safety of his said automobile and was in no manner guilty of disorderly conduct or other offense, when said mob vi ciously, wilfully, wantonly and unlawfully and with great force and violence assaulted and attacked plaintiff and his said automobile, and threw bricks, stones and missiles upon and against said automobile and into said automo- 16 bile and struck the plaintiff with said bricks, stones and missiles on various parts of his body and head and fractured his skull and cut his head open, and severely internally and ex ternally wounded and injured the plaintiff; 3 that as a direct and proximate result thereof the plaintiff became sick, sore, lame and dis able, and unable to work and to attend to his business and affairs and so remained for a long space of time; that plaintiff paid out and obligated himself to pay out divers large sums of money to-wit, $300,00 in endeavoring to be cured of said injuries as aforesaid and not otherwise; that plaintiff’s automobile was badly damaged, smashed, broken and bent, 3. That on the said 14th day of August, 1947, their (sic) existed in the State of Illinois a certain valid penal statute entitled: An Act To Suppress Mob Violence (Illinois Revised Sta tutes, 1945, Chapter 38, Sections 512-517) which provides a penalty against the defend ant for allowing an unlawful assemblage as aforesaid. The pertinent sections of said sta tute applicable to the allegations of law here in contained, are as follows: “Sec. 512 - - Mob defined . . . . . “Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, represented in the general assembly: That any collection of indivi duals, five or more in number, assem bled for the unlawful purpose of offering violence to the person or property of anyone supposed to have been guilty of a 17 violation of the law, or for the purpose of exercising correctional powers or re gulative powers over any person by vio lence and without lawful authority, shall be regarded and designated as a *mob". 4 “ Sec. 513 - - Serious injury defined . . . “The term ‘ serious injury’, for the pur poses of this act, shall include any in jury to property which shall cause dam age to the owner thereof, or any injury to the person which shall temporarily or permanently disable the person injured from earning a livelihood." “Sec. 514 - - Intent to inflict injury, pen alty . . . “ Sec. 513 - - Damage by violence, penal ty, action against municipality . . . . . “Any person or persons composing a mob under the provisions of this act, who shall by violence inflict material damage to the property or serious injury to the person of any other person upon the pretense of exercising correctional powers over such person or persons, by violence and without authority of law, shall be deemed guilty of a felony and shall suffer im prisonment in the penitentiary not ex ceeding five years; and any person so suffering material damage to property or injury to person by a mob shall have an ac+ion against the county, park district or city in which such injury is inflicted for such damages as he may sustain to an amount not exceeding $10,000.00*. 4. That on January 30, 1948, andwithinsix months of the acts complained of plaintiff served upon said defendant through the City 5 Clerk and City Attorney of the City of Chi cago, due and proper notice which was and is in the following words and figures: “NOTICE To: The City Clerk of the City of Chicago. To: The City Attorney of the City of Chicago. You, and Each of You, are hereby notified that in complaince with Sections 6 and 7 of an Act concerning statutes at law for personal injuries and against Cities, Villages and Towns, “Chap. 70. 111. Rev. Statutes": That Wilbert K. Slaton is about to bring suit against the City of Chicago for damages on account of personal injuries sustained by said Wilbert K. Slaton, when he was attacked by a mob August 14, 1947, shortly after mid night at the intersection of West 103rd Street and South Halsted Street, Chicago, Illinois. That the name of the person to whom the causes of action accrued is Wilbert K. Slaton and his address is 11442 South Carpenter Street, Chicago, Illinois, which was his ad dress at the time he was attacked and injured by said mob with bricks, and remains his ad dress at the present time. That the date said Wilbert K. Slaton was attacked by said mob and injured by being hit with a brick or bricks was August 14, 1947, at the intersection of West 103rdStreet and South Halsted Street, Chicago, Illinois, about 12:30 A.M. That said Wilbert K. Slaton was given first aid at the Provident Hospital 426 East 51st Street, Chicago, Illinois, and was later sent to the Cook County Hospital, 1835 W. Harri son Street, Chicago, Illinois, after which he 18 was taken home and was then and there under the care of Dr. Roger Spencer, 6252 South Parkway, and Dr. Ellsworth Hasbrouck, 5306 South Cottage Grove Avenue; that said doc tors are his attending physicians. / s / Henry C. Ferguson Attorney for Wilbert K. Slaton 180 W. Washington Street, 601 Ran 6577 Received a copy of the above and foregoing notice this day of , A . D., 1948. Received Department of Law, City of 1948Jan304 11 Chicago, date rec’d 1-30-48 Time 4:15 P.M. Benjamin S. Adamowski, Corporation Ludwig D. Counsel by J. Johnston, Re- Schreiber cords Section (seal) City Clerk, Chicago, 111. 5. T̂ he plaintiff demands judgment in the sum of $10,000, and for other and further re lief. s / Henry C. Ferguson Attorney For The Plaintiff 19-20 Answer of defendant, City of Chicago, filed the 1st day of July, 1949, as follows (omitting title of Court and cause): The defendant, City of Chicago, by Benja min S. Adamowski, Corporation Counsel, an swering Amended Complaint of Plaintiff says: 1. Admits the allegations in Paragraph 1. 2. Denies the allegations alleged in Para graph 2. - 6 - 20 3. Admits the allegations alleged in para graph 3. 4. Denies that notice was filed complying with Section 1-11 of the Revised Cities and Villages Act. 5. Denies that the plaintiff, Wilbert K. Sla ton, is entitled to damages in the sum of $10,000.00 or for any other sum of money. Benjamin S. Adamowski, Corporation Counsel By f s j Manning J. Peters &. Jos. M .G ri- gal-Assistant Corporation Counsel 21-24 Order, entered the 9th day of April, 1951, motion of plaintiff granting leave to Henry C. Ferguson to withdraw his appearance as at torney for the plaintiff and granting leave to Fleetwood M. McCoy to substitute his appear ance as attorney for plaintiff in the place and stead of Henry C. Ferguson. 26 Order, entered the 22nd day of April, 1953, assigning cause to Judge Dempsey. 27-28 Motion of defendant, City of Chicago, at the close of all the evidence for the plaintiff to exclude same from the jury and to give to said jury the following instruction, viz: “The Court instructs the jury to find the defendant. City of Chicago, not guilty." Granted. 29-30 Instruction given by the Court to the jury to find the defendant, City of Chicago, not guilty. 31-32 Verdict, filed the 24th day of April, 1953: “ We the jury find the defendant not guil ty ." (signed by twelve jurors) Judgment order of April 24, 1953: This day again come the parties to this suit by their attorneys respectively, and the jury - 7 - 33 8 heretofore impaneled herein for the trial of this cause also come. Whereupon at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence, and on motion of the defendant, City Of Chicago, a Municipal Corporation, the court instruct the jury to find the said defend ant not guilty, and the jury say: “We the jury, find the defendant. City Of Chicago, a Muni cipal Corporation, not guilty". Therefore, it is considered by the court that the plaintiff take nothing by his said suit and that the defendant go hence without day, and that the defendant do have and recover of and from the plaintiff Wilbert K. Slaton, its costs and charges in this behalf expended and have execution therefor. 34 Motion by the plaintiff for a new trial filed the 30th day of April, 1953, as follows (omit ting title of Court and cause): Now comes Wilbert K. Slaton, plaintiff in the above entitled cause, by his attorney, Fleetwood M. McCoy, and moves that the dir ected verdict by the jury in said cause be set aside and that the judgment heretofore entered on said verdict be vacated and set aside and that a new trial be granted to the plaintiff, and for reasons of said motion states the fol lowing: 1. The verdict is clearly and palpably against the weight of the evidence. 2. The directed verdict is contrary to law. 3. The directed verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence. 4. The Court erred in refusing to admit proper and legal evidence offered on behalf of the plaintiff. 5. The Court erred in giving to the jury improper instruction on behalf of the defend ant. 6. There is no sufficient or substantial evi dence tending to support the verdict of the jury. 7. The Court erred in refusing to require defendant to move forward with its evidence, if any, at the close of the plaintiff’ s case. 35 8. The Court erred in refusing to submit the case to the jury for its consideration at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence. 9. The Court erred in refusing to give to the jury proper instructions submitted by the plaintiff. J s] Fleetwood M. McCoy Attorney for Plaintiff 37 Order, entered the 11th day of November, 1953, overruling motion for a new trial, as follows (omitting title of Court and cause): This cause coming on to be heard upon the plaintiff’s motion for a new' trial here in, after argument of counsel and due de liberation by the Court, the said motion is overruled and a new trial denied. Enter / s / John T. Dempsey Judge Dated: November 11, 1953 39 Notice of Appeal, filed the 8th day of Janu ary, 1954, as follows: - 9 - 10 - Appeal To The Appellate Court Of Illinois First District From The Circuit Court Of Cook County (Title Of Court And Cause) NOTICE OF APPEAL Wilbert K. Slaton, plaintiff-appellant in the above-entitled cause, hereby appeals to the Appellate Court of Illinois, for the First Dis trict, from the judgment rendered and entered in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, in the above entitled cause on the 24th day of April, 1953, on the directed verdict of the jury finding the defendant in the above en titled cause not guilty; and from the final or der rendered and entered in the above entitled cause on the 24th (sic) day of November, 1953, which final order denied the plaintiff-appel lant's motion for a new trial. Wilbert K. Slaton, plaintiff-appellant herein prays that the said judgment and said final or der be reversed and said cause remanded for a new trial, and that the plaintiff-appellant be granted such other and further relief as the Court shall deem meet. Dated: at Chicago, Illinois, this 8th day of January, 1954. Wilbert K. Slaton, Plaintiff-Appellant By: f s / Fleetwood M. McCoy His Attorney 40-41 Proof of service of notice of appeal, filed the 11th day of January, 1954. 43-44 Praecipe for trial Court record, filed the 14th day of January, 1954. 45 Proof of service of praecipe for trial Court record, filed the 14th day of January, 1954. 11 - 47-49 Amended praecipe for trial Court record, filed the 15th day of January, 1954. 50 Proof of service of amended praecipe for trial Court record, filed the 15th day of Jan uary, 1954. 51 Stipulation filed February 19, 1954. 52 Stipulation between counsel for appellant and appellee that the original copy of the Re port of Proceedings at the trial in the above entitled cause may be incorporated in the re cord on appeal. 53-54 Report of Proceedings approved by Judge Dempsey and filed the V9th day of February, 1954. 55 Report of Proceedings had at the trial of the above-entitled case before the Honorable John T. Dempsey, Judge of said Court, and a jury, commencing on the 22nd day of April, A.D., 1953. Mr. Fleetwood M. McCoy and Mr. Walter K. Black appeared for plaintiff, Mr. John J. Mortimer, Chief Corporation Counsel by Mr. Edward R. Hartigan and Mr. Joseph W. Grigal, assistant Corporation Counsel, ap peared for the defendant. 67 WILBERT K. SLATON, plaintiff, called as a witness in his own behalf, being first duly sworn, was examined and testified as fol lows: Direct Examination by Mr. McCoy My name is Wilbert K. Slaton. I live at 6556 South Ingleside Avenue, Chicago. On the 12 - 14th day of August, 1947, I lived at 11442 South Carpenter Street. I had occasion, on the 14th day of August, 1947, to be in the vicinity of 103rd Street and Halsted Street. I was in my brother’s gray-colored, 1946 Plymouth convertible, two-door automobile at that place 68 and time. It was warm and we were driving with the top down. The time of day was be tween 11:00 and 11:30 P.M. The trip in ques tion started from 112th Street and Bishop at about 11:00 o’clock. There were three girls and two fellows with me. 69 Their names were John and Nathaniel Gray; Elsie Harmon; Arlene Porter, and Dorothy Townsend. We started the trip together and were on our way to the Jackson Park Beach. After leaving the point of departure, we went North on Bishop to 111th thence East on 111th to Halsted thence North on Halsted to 107th Street. Q. What happened, if anything, at 107th Street? A. We were detoured two blocks west of Halsted. Q. By whom were you detoured? A. By two policemen that were on the street, there. The streets were blocked by wooden horses. Q. I see. Then what direction did you take ? A. We went West off of Halsted Street to 107th, to Peoria Street, two blocks West. Q. Then, what happened there? A. And then we were detoured again; there 70 was a bus, a C .T .A . bus, in front of us and we were following the bus, and the bus would be detoured and we were detoured, also. - 13 - Q. By whom? A. By the police on the corner. Q. What direction did you take? A. North to 103rd Street. Q. And what happened at 103rd Street? A. At 103rd Street, the bus stopped to pick up or discharge some passengers, and we swung around it and turned East again. Q. Was there anyone to detour you at 103rd Street ? A. No there wasn’ t anyone there. Q. Who was driving? A. I was driving. Q. Were you driving when you began this trip? A. Yes, I was. Q. Now, what happened when you turned East into 103rd Street? A. Well, when we turned East on 103rd Street, we noticed some people had gathered along the street and they were in dribbles all the way up from Peoria Street to 103rd Street and Halsted, mostly on the South side of the street, and as we approached 103rd and Hal- 71 sted, the crowd began getting thicker, and I suppose - - Q. Don’t tell us what you suppose. Did you notice or hear anything unusual as you drove along 103rd Street from Peoria to Halsted? A. Yes; well, as the crowd got thicker, the crowd started calling us names, saying “nig gers* and “here comes a bunch of niggers" and what not — Q. Did you hear anything else? - 14 - A. Well, when we got to Halsted Street, we heard some of the crowd holler, “Get that nigger driver in that car; what is thatso-and -so doing driving through here? Get that nig ger driver of that ca r ," Q. What do you mean by so-and-so? A. “Black son-of-a-bitch," or words to that affect, I don’t remember all the words we were called, but that was one of the, and “ niggers." Q. You say the crowd — will you describe the crowd to the jury, the Court and the jury? A, Well, the crowd — Q. (Interrupting) Can you describe the number, and so forth, and the position of the crowd? A, It was from the corner of 103rd, they were all on the southwest corner; it was crowded — you couldn't see the street for 72’ the crowd of people, and the crowd extended from the Northwest corner in a sem i-circle around, I mean — from the southwest corner, around to the northeast corner, and it was very thickly crowded; I imagine there were around 500 people, or more, Q. All right; what happened as you got to Halsted Street; what did you do in the opera tion of the automobile? A, Well, when I got to Halsted Street, the crowd started calling us names and saying, “Get the driver of that car; get that nigger," And I was a little excited and I tried to get out of there. And as I was goingto turn north on Halsted Street, and as I started to turn the car, they started throwing bricks at me, 15 and several of the bricks hit in the car, and the side of the car, and one struck me on the right side of my skull. Q. Mr. Slaton, about what position was the car in when you were struck? A. Well, I was just about to complete my turn into Halsted Street; I was already facing north. Q. And where did these bricks and so forth, come from? A. Well, from the southeast corner of the intersection and all along there; they were throwing bricks at us. I could *t exactly tell 73 where they all came from. Q. Now, what happened when you were struck? A. Well, I blacked out for a second; I slumped over the wheel and Nathaniel Gray, who was in the car, said, “Get this thing out of here, fellow,* and I suppose that kind of brought me to, and I started to drive again and drove as fast as I could until I got away from there. Q. How did you feel after the blow? A. Well, my head was hurting terribly and blood was running all down the side of my head, and as I drove away, one of the girls in the back seat noticed the blood, and she took her handkerchief — she took a handker chief from one of the fellows and she held my head while I drove. Q. Will you point to the place on your head where you received the blow? A. It was there (indicating). - 16 Mr. McCoy: Indicating the position in the right periotic region of the head. After we left there, we drove North on Hal- 74 sted Street to Vincennes, thence down Vin cennes to State, and down State to 60th Street and over 60th Street east to Washington Park. When I reached Washington Park, I was too weak to drive any further, so I told one of the fellows in the car to drive for me, and we headed for Provident Hospital which is lo cated on 51st Street between South Parkway and Vincennes or St. Lawrence. John Gray, who was one of our party, drove the car. Q. And what, if anything, - - what happened when you got to Provident Hospital? A. When I got to Provident Hospital and went into the waiting room, I found that I couldn’t open my mouth wide enough to talk, and I couldn't speak plainly at all; all I could do was mumble, so when the attendant there asked the questions, Nathaniel Gray did the answering, and I could hear what was going on, but I couldn't answer; I was conscious, and he asked what happened he told him I was 75 hit by a mob at 103rd and Halsted, and there were several other people in there waiting for treatment, also, that had been through the same bunch, and they said I should go to the County Hospital because they couldn’t take me right away; and they wanted me to receive treatment right away. Q. What happened next? A. So they suggested that we wait for an ambulance or patrol wagon to come and pick 17 - us up, but my friends wanted me to get over there as quick as possible, so they drove me over to Provident Hospital - - John Gray, I mean, over to the County Hospital. Q. And what happened when you arrived at the County Hospital? A. At the County Hospital I was treated and my head was stitched, and there was four stitches taken in my head. I stayed at the County Hospital about four hours. Afterwards, I was put into the car and driven home. When I arrived home my mother put me to bed and contacted Dr. Roger Spen- 76 cer, whose offices are located on the corner of 63rd and South Park. I saw Dr. Spencer the next morning at his offices. He examined the wound, changed the bandages and sent me to an X-ray laboratory to have X-rays made of my head. The X-rays were made by a Dr. Mitchell on 47th Street in the South Center Building. I went back to see Dr. Spencer and after he received the X -rays, he stated that I had a fractured skull and that he would rather I be treated by a bone specialist. Dr. Spencer sent me to Dr. Hasbrouck whose offices are located on the corner of 63rd and Cottage Grove. I saw Dr. Hasbrouck the following day and he examined the X-rays, examined me and dressed my wound. As I was still in consider able pain he gave me some sedatives. I saw Dr. Hasbrouck about every other day for about four weeks. After that, Dr. Hasbrouck cut down my visits to about twice a week and that schedule lasted for about an additional six 18 weeks. Thereafter, my visits to Dr. Has- brouck were limited to about once a week for about two or three weeks, and, finally to about one visit per month. 78 Q. How long did you remain under Dr. Has- brouck’s treatment? A. Well, right now, I am still going to him once in a while, when I have those severe headaches, so I suppose I am still under his care. Q. I see. Now, tell us about this speech impediment you mentioned. You say that when you got to Provident Hospital, you couldn’t make yourself understood, is that right? A. That is right. Q. You couldn’t talk clearly? A. Yes. Q. And how long did that condition last? A. Well, that lasted, I will say for about three weeks. I could mumble things and I could make people understand by using my hands. I was in severe pain for about three or four weeks as a result of my head continuing to 79 hurt. On one of my visits to the doctor he had to open up the wound and drain it because it had become infected. This was extremely painful. I also experienced dizziness along with pain. Three or four weeks after I was struck, I started back to work but my condi tion was still such that I experienced head aches occasionally, especially when I became tired or got over-heated. These attacks oc curred about every other day or so, or about 19 - two or three times a week and would last un til I retired for the night. At the present time I have occasional headaches on the same side 80 where I was struck. My speech impediment is not as bad now as formerly because I have learned to speak more slowly. I still stam mer whenever I forget and try to talk fast. In the acute stage this speech impediment lasted for about four weeks. The impediment continued to be noticeable to others for about a year. At the time of this occurrence I was em ployed at Johnson’s Drug Store which is lo cated at 103rd and Hale at a salary of $42.50 81 per week. I returned to work about 3 ior four weeks after the accident at the same rate of pay. Prior to this injury, I was in very good health and had not had any serious illnesses 82 or suffered from any aches or pains in the head. At the time of this occurrence in 1947 I was about twenty-seven years old. Cross Examination by Mr. Hartigan I started from 112th Street and Bishop about 11:00 or 11:30 at night. When I got to 107th Street, I was detoured by one of two or more 83 policemen stationed there. There was not a gathering of people in that vicinity at that time. Nor was there a gathering of people on the corner of Peoria when I got there. There was a policeman on the corner of 107th Street and Peoria. When I got to 103rd Street and Peoria, I didn’t notice any policemen. 84 20 - nor were there a great number of people gathered there. When I turned East on 103rd Street, I think there was an automobile in front of me, but I don’t know how many people were in it. 85 As I neared Green Street, I noticed more people along the South side of the street, but they didn’ t attempt to blockade my car prior to reaching Halsted. At Halsted the crowd was so dense, I couldn’t see up 103rd Street. They were all assembled in 103rd Street, East of Halsted and none were assembled in 86 the street West of Halsted. The people as sembled on the southwest corner of 103rd Street and Halsted didn’t get over into the street. I don’t remember seeing any police at 103rd and Halsted. And when I made the left turn, I was pelted with various rocks and m issiles. 87 It took me about forty-five minutes to get from 103rd and Halsted to Provident Hospi tal. After I left 103rd and Halsted my pro gress was not impeded. It took me about for ty-five minutes to an hour to get from Pro- 88 vident Hospital to the County Hospital. I was given first aid at the County Hospital but I don’t remember the name of the doctor who treated me. I had four stitches taken in my head at that time. 90 Q, Now, at 100th Street, when you ap proached Halsted Street, will you tell us just what the crowd or gathering did there, and what they said at that time? A . Well, when I reached Halsted Street - - 21 they had been calling us “niggers® all the time all along there, and a couple of them said, “Let’ s get that nigger driver in the car,® And right there is a red light, and I think I had paused for a second, you know for the red 91 light, and it had probably changed green, and I started off, and as I started off the crowd kept hollering, “Get that nigger driver in the car,® And they started throwing bricks at me, 92 NATHANIEL GRAY, witness, called and sworn on behalf of the plaintiff, testified as fol lows: Direct Examination by Mr, McCoy I am in the Navy, but my permanent ad- 93 dress is 813 East 131st Street. On the 14th day of August, 1947, I lived in Morgan Park, 114th and Carpenter; I think the number was 11437, I knew Wilbert K. Slaton at that time, I was with him, Elsie Gray, nee Harmon, John Gray, Arlene Porter and Dorothy Town send on the evening in question, I think we 94 began our auto trip from 111th and Bishop to go to Jackson Park, We proceeded on 111th Street to Halsted, thence North on Halsted to 107th Street. Slaton was driving. At 107th Street, there was a police officer in the street directing traffic West from Halsted Street. When we got there we simply turned West and followed the other traffic over to Peoria 95 Street. At Peoria we again turned North and went up to 103rd Street. As we wanted to get 22 - back on Halsted Street, we turned East on 103rd Street. Slaton was still driving. After we turned off Peoria into 103rd Street and had proceeded about a block, we began to notice people congregating along the side of the street. As we got within about fifty feet of Halsted Street, we saw large num bers of them massed on three corners of 103rd and Halsted. 96 Mr. McCoy: Q. Did you hear anything being said as you approached Halsted Street? The Witness: A. Well, we were following the traffic into Halsted Street, and we were proceeding fairly slow, and as we got up there, I guess, say about twenty feet from the corner, we heard somebody hollering, "There is some niggers." So then I had noticed the crowd, but I hadn’t given it much thought un til I heard a lots of them say, “ There is some niggers," so it seems that started it. And they picked it up, and somebody said, “Stop them niggers." So they said, “Get that nigger dri v er ." So I said “We’d better get out of here," so just as we started to pull around the car in front, somebody said, “Kill the driver; kill that nigger driver.” And it began to rain bricks and I guess, bottles, and everything, on the car. I was sitting in the front seat and Miss Townsend was next to me, and Slaton was driving, so when they started to throw, I heard - - I don’t know who got hit first, her or him, but I heard the sounds of the bricks, or whatever it was, hitting in the car, so all at once Slaton slumped over the steering wheel 23 and stopped the car momentarily, and I said, 97 “ Man, we have got to get out of here." So he roused up and pulled around the car that was in front of us, and turned North on Halsted, and he drove to about, I think, 89th Street, and some girl in the back of us was holding a handkerchief over his head. Q. Now, I want to stop you for a moment. Were these missiles and bricks that were being thrown, where were these bricks and missiles coming from? A. From the southwest side of 103rd Street, that was where the crowd was, and most of the bricks were coming from there where the crowd was massed on the sidewalk. Slaton then drove up to 89th Street where he stopped to stop the flow of blood from a hole in his head right up above his right ear and wipe it out of his eyes. We thought it 98 best he get to the hospital, so my brother drove there from about 60th and South Park way where he took the wheel after Slaton had stopped the car because of dizziness and blurred vision. When we got to Provident Hospital we found that there were a number of other people waiting for treatment and that Slaton wouldn’t be cared for right away. Because Slaton had lost his power of speech, we put him back in the car and took him over 99 to the County Hospital. There was a little mix-up at the County Hospital because they wanted Slaton to give them the history of the case but he couldn’t talk and so I answered the questions for him. After getting the history 24 of the case, they washed Slaton’s face and then stitched up the wound in his head. We were at the County Hospital about three or four hours. Cross Examination by Mr. Hartigan I have known the plaintiff about twelve 100 years. When we got down to 107th Street and Halsted, there was a policeman there detour ing traffic West to Peoria Street. We followed the detoured traffic west on 107th to Peoria. I didn’t see any policemen at 103rd Street and Peoria when we reached there. There was no bus in front of us when we reached 103rd and Peoria. We passed it somewhere between 107th and 103rd on Peoria. There was not an unusual gathering of people on Peoria where we passed the bus. There were more and 101 more people along 103rd Street as we neared Halsted Street. At Halsted Street, the crowd was densely packed. The crowd was congre gated on the Southeast corner and the North east corner as well as on the Southwest cor ner. Both 103rd Street and Halsted Street were reasonably clear of the crowd. 102 I didn’t see any policemen at the bigger gathering of people at 103rd and Halsted Street. There might have been policemen there but my interest was taken up with the size of the crowd and its conduct. I was sit ting on the side nearest the people when they started pelting our car with rocks. A girl was between myself and Slaton on the front seat of 25 103 the car which was a convertible with the top down. It took us about forty minutes to get down to Provident Hospital and about forty minutes to get from there to the County Hos pital. This incident occurred about uine o*- 104 clock at night. After leaving the County Hos pital, my brother drove Slaton home. JOHN GRAY, called as a witness on behalf of the plaintiff, being first duly sworn was examined and testified as follows: Direct Examination by Mr. McCoy I knew the plaintiff on the 14th day of Aug ust, 1947, and had occasion to be with him in his automobile that night. 106 My brother and three girls were also pre sent. We all got together at a celebration they were having in Morgan Park and decided to go to the beach. The plaintiff, who was at the wheel, drove out 111th Street east to Hal- 107 sted, starting around nine o'clock. When we reached Halsted we went North to 107th Street, where we were detoured over west to Peoria Street by policemen at the corner of 107th and Halsted. When we reached Peo ria we then turned North into Peoria and continued on Peoria until we reached 103rd. 108 When we reached 103rd and Peoria there was a bus in front of us but we pulled around it and headed East on 103rd Street. Abouc one half block before we reached Halsted we could see a crowd. The crowd was large and as we approached Halsted Street some of them be gan to yell “Here comes some niggers.” As 26 we got nearer Halsted, some of the crowd started hollering “Get that nigger driver in the car.* Then they started throwing bricks, and one of the bricks hit the plaintiff and one 109 hit one of the girls in the front seat. The car was still headed East when this occurred but after being struck by the brick and momen tarily knocked out, the plaintiff straightened up and drove the car North on Halsted Street. Mr. McCoy: Q. When you say "straightened up," say what you mean? The Witness: A. Well, after he was hit with the brick, he was knocked out for awhile. Q. And did you notice where the bricks came from? A. They came from the crowd, from the South side of the street; the South side of 103rd Street. Q. And when did the bricks begin to come? A. After they said, "Stop that nigger driver in that car.'* Q. You heard them say, “ Stop that nigger driver in that car? * A. Yes. 110 Q. Then the bricks came? A. Yes. Q. Then he was struck, is that right? A . Yes. After he was struck, I noticed that he was bleeding about the head and that there was a gash in it deep enough to expose the bone. When we reached Washington Park the plain tiff said he was getting dizzy and couldn’t drive any further, so I drove the car from there to Provident Hospital. I 27 Cross Examination by Mr. Hartigan 113 There was quite an assemblage of people at 103rd and Halsted Street. They formed a sem i-circle from the East side of 103rd Street back around to the West side of 103rd and Halsted. The sem i-circle ran from the 114 Northeast corner to the southwest corner of 103rd and Halsted. I did not see a police- 115 man from the time we left 107th and Halsted until we reached 103rd and Halsted where I saw a policeman out in the middle of the street. This incident occurred about 9:00 o’ clock. Plaintiff’ s Exhibit 1 119 Document marked Plaintiff’ s Exhibit 1 for identification offered in evidence without ob jection and received by the Court. Said Plain tiff’s Exhibit 1 is in words and figures as foHows: “NOTICE To: The City Clerk of the City of Chicago. To: The City Attorney of the City of Chicago. You, And Each of You, are hereby notified that in compliance with Sections 6 and 7 of an Act concerning statutes at law for personal injuries and against Cities, Villages and Towns, “Chap. 70. 111. Rev. Statutes*: That Wilbert K. Slaton is about to bring suit against the City of Chicago for damages on account of personal injuries sustained by said Wilbert K. Slaton, when he was attacked by a mob August 14, 1947, shortly after mid night at the intersection of West 103rd Street 28 - and South Halsted Street, Chicago, Illinois, That the name of the person to whom the causes of action accrued is Wilbert K. Slaton and his address is 11442 South Carpenter Street, Chicago, Illinois, which was his ad dress at the time he was attacked and injured by said mob with bricks, and remains his ad dress at the present time. That the date said Wilbert K, Slaton was at tacked by said mob and injured by being hit with a brick or bricks was August 14, 1947 at the intersection of West 103rd Street and South Halsted Street, Chicago, Illinois, about 12:30 A.M. That said Wilbert K„ Slaton was given first aid at the Provident Hospital 426 East 51st Street, Chicago, Illinois, and was later sent to the Cook County Hospital 1835 S. Harrison Street, Chicago, Illinois, after which he was taken home and was then and there under the care of Dr, Roger Spencer, 6252 South Park way, and Dr. Ellsworth Hasbrouck, 6306 South Cottage Grove Avenue; that said doc tors are his attending physicians, J sj Henry C. Ferguson Attorney for Wilbert K. Slaton 180 W. Washington Street, 601 Ran 6577 Received a copy of the above and foregoing notice this day of , A.D., 1948. Received Department of Law, City of 1948 Jan 30 4 11 Chicago, date rec’d 1-30-48 Time 4:15 P.M. BenjaminS. Adamowski, Corporation Ludwig D. Counsel, by J. Johnston, Re- Schreiber cords Section (seal) City Clerk, Chicago, 111. 29 - 120 ELSIE GRAY, called as a witness on behalf of the plaintiff, having been duly sworn, testified as follows: Direct Examination by Mr, McCoy I live at 13 East 131st Street but on the 14th day of August, 1947,1 lived at 1156 West 112th Street. I know the plaintiff, Wilbert Slaton, in 121 this case and was in his company and that of John Gray, Arlene Porter, Nathaniel Gray, and Dorothy Towns (sic) on the evening of the 122 date in question, riding to the beach. The car was a yellow convertible and Mr. Slaton was at the wheel. When we started out to go to the beach we drove East on II 1th Street to Hal- sted where we turned North continuing on Halsted to 107th Street. When we reached 107th Street we saw two policemen directing traffic to detour back west. We went over 107th Street west about two blocks to Peoria. At Peoria Street we turned back north and 124 followed a C .T.A. bus up to 103rd Street. At 103rd Street we turned to get back on Halsted Street and continue our trip to the 125 beach. As we drove on we saw quite a few people in the street. And as we went down 103rd to Halsted the crowd of people began to holler. The crowd of people began to hol ler. The crowd numbered several hundred. Mr. McCoy: Q. All rights Now you say the crowd began to do what? The Witness: A. Began to holler. Q. What did you hear. What, if anything did you hear?- 30 A. Well, they called us dirty names at first, and somebody said “Where do you nig gers think you are going over here? ’* Q. Did you hear anything further? 126 A. They said “Get back where you belong, * and somebody hollered “Get the driver. Kill the dirty nigger,* and then they began throw ing bricks. Q. Where was the automobile at the time the bricks began to come? A. We were turning off 103rd to Halsted, going back North on Halsted. Q. From which direction were these bricks coming? A. They were coming from the right. 127 The first brick caught Mr. Slaton in the head and then bricks started coming so fast someone hollered “ Man, get out of here.* Mr. Slaton was stunned for a moment and caused the car to stop. He roused himself and tried to get the car started. Mr. Slaton 128 finally got the car started and drove on for awhile until he got weak and had to give up the wheel. After that we went on to Provident 129 Hospital but after arriving there we were told that it might be best for us to go to the County Hospital. We then all went to the County Hospital where Mr. Slaton received 130 medical attention. After spending about four hours at the County Hospital, we all left for home. Cross Examination by Mr. Hartigan 132 The crowd on 103rd and Halsted were to the left and to the right as we were about to 133 turn off 103rd Street North on Halsted. By- left and right of me, I mean the crowd was on the Southeast corner and the Northeast corner. There might have been some on the Northwest corner and the Southwest but I don’t remember whether there were or not. 134 Mr. Hartigan: Q. At the time the crowd was throwing these bricks or missiles at your car, at the time that Mr. Slaton was struck, what happened to the car? Was it still in motion? A. At the time he was struck? Q. Yes. A. At the time he was struck we were just turning the corner. Q, The car was in motion making the turn? A. That is right. 135 After that the car stopped for about two or three minutes. Then Mr. Slaton started it up again and we continued North on Halsted Street. Later Mr. Gray took over the driving of the car. MRS. WALTER R. SASSAMAN being called as a witness on behalf of the plaintiff here in, having been first duly sworn, testified as follows: Direct Examination by Mr. McCoy 138 I am M rs. Walter R. Sassaman and I live at 6420 South Dorchester. On the 14th day of August, 1947, I lived at 11027 Green Street. I am familiar with the Fernwood Parkdevel- - 31 - 32 opment located on Halsted from about 103rd to 105th about four blocks from my then re sidence. The project was located East of Hal- 140 sted. My relationship with the project devel opment was that of Secretary of the Fernwood 142 Goodwill Committee. On the 14th day of Aug ust, 1947, thousands of people gathered inthe area around the Fernwood project hollering, screaming, yelling in the streets, threaten ing and behaving terribly, with baseball bats and clubs and stopping cars and making tele phone calls threatening me and people who 144 lived in the project. I did not live in the pro ject. There were eight Negro families living there and the rest of the tenants were white. I believe the project contained sixty-seven units. Mr. McCoy: Q. And when were these Ne gro families moved into the project? A. On Tuesday, the 12th. Q. The 12th of August? A. Yes. Q. And after they were moved in did any thing unusual develop? A. Yes. Q. Tell the Court and jury what did develop that was unusual after these Negro families moved in? A. The whole park, Halsted Street for blocks around mobs gathered and threatened to evict the Negro families from their homes by violence, if necessary. Mr. Hartigan: I move that that be stricken, if the Court please. 33 The Court: Objection sustained. Mr. McCoy: Which part of it? Does all of the answer go out? If the Court please, she said that — her answer may be separated into two parts. (To reporter) Will you read the answer again? (Answer read) The Court: The first part of the answer may stand, about the crowds gathering - - Mr. Hartigan: I submit — The Court: And the threats made. Mr. Hartigan: Now, just a moment. The Court: Those parts of the answer which are conclusions, such as by force if neces sary, and anything that follows that, will be stricken and the jury is instructed to disre gard that portion of the answer. Mr. McCoy: It may stand down to threats made. 148 I had occasion to visit the project area about nine o’clock at night on the 14th day of August, 1947. I was in a taxicab for about an hour and a half that couldn't move either back ward or forward. This taxicab was back of the project around 104th Street. Mr. McCoy: Q. And what did you observe, if anything? A. Thousands of people, pounding on the windows, opening the doors of the taxicab, trying to push it over, some of them saying “There aren’t any niggers in there, let 'em go. We are going to run the niggers out of the project, get ‘em out of here,” and pound- ing, yelling, and screaming at me, and sur rounding the taxicab so that we couldn’t move. 34 - and policemen were there, and the crowd were throwing stones and having bats and sticks; and it was the worst day of the riot ing. Mr. Hartigan: I object to that, and ask that that be stricken. 149 The Court: The last sentence of the answer may be stricken. Mr. McCoy: Q. Where did you observe this mob conducting itself as you have told us a- bout? A. Oh, for several blocks all around the project. Q. Would you say in the vicinity of 103rd and Halsted? A . We went past there. Q. What did you see when----- Mr. Hartigan: That is objected to. Mr. McCoy: Approximately what time was this when you passed 103rd and Halsted on that evening? A. Well, it was between nine and eleven. I arrived at the university about eleven and left home about nine. Q. What did you observe in the vicinity of 103rd on that evening? A. The same kind of mob action that I de scribed. Cross Examination by Mr. Hartigan I first went to the project on 104th Street in the morning of August 14, 1947. It was about 150 ten o’clock in the morning when I first went - 35 there. I walked to the project from my home for the purpose of delivering a message to one of the tenants in the project from Mr. Tom Wright of the Mayor’s Commission on Human Relations. I stayed in the project about 151 twenty minutes. Mr. Tom Wright was execu- 152 tive secretary of the Commission. Mr. Wright’ s request was made by telephone call to me made, presumably, from his office. His 153 office was located somewhere downtown. The 154 city was interested in this project because it was built by the Chicago Housing Authority. The Mayor’s Commission on Human Relations was very active in attempting to help the ten ants in the community to make this adjust ment. I returned to the project area about four o’clock in the afternoon to see how the children of one of the families were getting along. 155 The next time that I was in the project area was in the evening when I left my home in a taxicab to take my child to stay with friends in the vicinity of the University of Chicago. I left home about nine o’clock. I 156 didn’t visit the project itself but was in the cab on Halsted Street directly opposite the project. Mobs of people hemmed the cab in so that it couldn’t move. The cab was facing • 157 North on Halsted Street and was about middle of the street. Halsted Street was just covered with people and they swarmed around the cab. 158 The progress of the cab was so impeded that it took two hours to make a trip that normally took only a half hour. I had asked the driver - 36 159 not to go Halsted Street because I saw mobs there, but he did, and I suppose about 105th Street it became difficult to drive. There were many police in the vicinity. When we got down to 104th Street we were stopped. The police didn’t ask the cab driver to go to another street at that time. He went straight down Halsted Street. I saw barricades all around in the streets. 160 I do not know the plaintiff in this case at all. I am here because I was subpoenaed. I 161 have the subpoena here. I haven’t seen anyone in this Court before. I don’t know anyone here. The lawyers in this case, Mr. McCoy and Mr. Black came out in the hall as I arrived and asked me to testify on my role in the Fern- wood Community. I don’t know what this case 162 is about. I don’t know how Mr. McCoy got my name. I never talked to Judge Ferguson about this case nor do I know him. ELLSWORTH EUGENE HASBROUCK, called as a witness on behalf of the plaintiff here in, having been first duly sworn, testified as follows: Direct Examination by Mr. McCoy 163 I am Ellsworth Eugene Hasbrouck and I live at 1019 Hyde Park Boulevard. I am a surgeon duly licensed to practice in the State of Illinois since March 19, 1939.1 am a grad uate of Howard University Medical School. I interned at Provident Hospital. I am a spec ialist in general surgery. I have had a five 37 year Rockefeller Foundation grant in re search, and postgraduate work in surgery. I am certified as a member of the American Board of Surgery, a fellow of the American College of Surgeons, and fellow of the Inter national College of Surgeons. I have special ized in the field of surgery since 1943. I be long to the American Medical Association, Chicago Medical Society, Illinois State Medi cal Society, Chicago Surgical Society, Cook County Physician’s Association. I am chair- 165 man of the Department of General Surgery at Provident Hospital and am an instructor of surgery at Chicago Medical School. I have been chairman of the department since 1948, and connected with the hospital since 1937. I have been instructor of surgery at Chicago Medical School for the past two and a half years. On or about the middle of August, 1947, I had occasion to see the plaintiff in this case, Wilbert Slaton, professionally. I saw him in my office at 6306 Cottage Grove. He was re ferred to me for examination and treatment of injuries previously sustained. I examined 166 him and gave him the indicated treatment. I have been attending and treating him since that time. Mr. McCoy: Q. Did you have occasion, doctor, to listen to his manner of speech when you first observed the plaintiff? The Witness: A. Yes, I did. Q. What, if anything, did you notice about it? 38 - A. Well, it was rather hesitant and blurred, Q. Doctor, will you describe in detail the examination you made on this occasion, both objectively and subjectively? A. Well, his subject or complaint which arose from him, the patient, were in rela tionship to an injury that he had previously sustained to his head. He complained of pain, headaches, dizziness and had a history of pre viously incoherent and inability to speak. However, he had regained his voice, and was speaking in the hesitant fashion that I pre- 167 viously outlined. Objectively, by inspection a laceration was seen in the right parietal re gion. That is at the roof of the skull. This had been previously sutured by first aid. There was a serum or fluid that was emit ting itself or actually present over the area of the laceration. A crust was forming over this laceration. By palpation or feeling of the area involved tenderness could be elicited, which is a sub jective complaint. By pressing the area the patient complained of pain. However, objectively there was a localized swelling, and a small amount of clear, but given to yellowish, product to be exposed. Further feeling, or on palpation of the area, it disclosed an opening that was communica ting with the laceration through the skull. Generally, his blood pressure was within normal realm, his temperature was slightly elevated to a low-grade fever, approximately ninety-nine degrees. His other systemic ex amination was otherwise negative. - 39 - Q. Did you make a diagnosis at that time, doctor? A. Yes, I did, Q. What diagnosis did you make? A, The diagnosis made at that time was a compound comminuted depressed skull frac- 168 ture associated with a plain concussion. There was evidence, even at first examination, that the laceration involving this compound frac ture was infected. Q. What area of the parietal region did that injury involve? A. The actual superior aspect of the par ietal region. The top of the skull, for all practical purposes, and anterior to the mid line near the suture, or the adjoining portion where the bones join each other. Q. Were the tables involved? A. Both tables of bone could be felt and subsequently seen after removal of the su tures. The hole itself could be seen, and it involved both tables of the skull. Q. Doctor, will you tell us the size of the injury or the fracture? The area? A. The size of the injured area could be approximated as an inch and a quarter. The whole laceration. The size of the compound skull fracture could be approximated at an inch. Q. Will you give us an idea of the depth of the fracture? A. Well, the depth of the depression would be estimated as a quarter of an inch depres sion. That is both tables of the skull itself 40 - 169 were depressed or pushed into the brain cavity approximately one quarter of an inch. Q. Will you explain to the jury what you mean by “tables"? A. The skull itself is made up of two lay ers, an inner and outer table. It is a shell within a shell. Between the two layers is the blood supply and a stringy type of bone. The outer hard layer is the protective agent of the skull and the brain. The inner layer car ries the blood vessels which nourishes not only the skull but the scalp. These two, the inner and outer shells, are approximately an eighth of an inch in thickness, so that it is a shell without a shell, and a shell within a shell, known as the inner and outer tables of the skull. Q. And you say both of the tables had been pierced? A. Both tables were depressed. That is, impacted from without in. Q. At that time, doctor, did you have oc casion to see the X -ray plates purportedly made of the plaintiff’ s injury? A. Yes, I did. Q. Who referred the plates to you? A. A previously seen physician who saw him one time, Dr. Spencer. 170 Q. Now, doctor, without reference to these X-ray plates were you able to make the diag nosis that you just gave us completely inde pendent of these plates? A. Oh, yes. It was obvious. Q. They were made clinically? 41 A. Yes, a clinic diagnosis supported how ever by X -rays, I saw the plaintiff approximately three times a week during the period of the treat ment of the infection. When I first saw him there were some sutures in place. Some were removed to promote drainage, to let some of the pus out from under his scalp. The infec- 171 tion on the scalp which was present was lo calized under treatment so that the abscess itself could be evacuated and the pus itself could be relieved. I saw the plaintiff three times a week for a period of about a month. The frequent visits were made because of the infection. We were giving him medica tion by mouth and injections and local heat applications to prevent the extention of the infection from the scalp or from the skull it self into the brain tissues which were com municating with it to prevent a brain abscess. 172 Q. Was the infection you treated him for directly associated with the injury? A. Yes, it was. The plaintiff is still under observation but no actual treatment is being administered at present. I last saw the plaintiff profession ally, last week. When I first saw him he ap peared to be in pain. The infection then pre sent was evidence of contamination, — bac terial involvement. There were germs that were in the wound in the area of the lacera tion that had established an infection under his scalp, perhaps from just environmental contamination. There was brain injury in - 42 - this case caused by the concussion which 174 goes with the skull fracturing hand in hand. If the injury is severe enough to cause bleed ing then there are small little hemorrhages that accumulate in all areas of the brain. As these heal they give you scar tissue. Mr. McCoy: Q. Is there usually involve ment of scar tissue in the brain pathologi cally? A. Pathologically? Q. Yes. A. Under the circumstances we have out lined, it is. Q. How is that involvement brought about? How does it operate? A. Well, you mean from concussion or from — Q. From the scar tissue resulting from the healing? A. From the healing. The area in which the infection is present, rather than having a normal thin scar which all normal healing has, has an additional scar which is nature’s attempt to fight off the invading infection. Subsequently, it throws out more scar tissue, more scar tissue to fight off the infection. The amount of scar tissue that is thrown out 175 is in direct proportion to thd threatening in fection, or you have a form of scar tissue which is a form of repair process and in ad dition to that you have scar tissue that is nature’s attempt to localize or fight off the infection, which was obvious in this case. Q. How is this scar tissue displaced in the 43 - brain? What, if any, damages is caused in the brain processes by this displaced scar tissue? A. Well, nerve never regenerates itself. Scar tissue is a permanent thing, very simi lar to what you might have from a scar on your hand. However, in brain tissue nerve tissue has not the ability to regenerate, so the scar is permanent. Q. Does it interfere with the nerve cen ters? A. Conduction of nerves. Approximately eighteen months after the injury, I made other X -ray plates of the plaintiff. X -ray plates shown me, marked 176 Plaintiff’s Exhibits 2, 3, 4, and 5 for identi fication are the X -ray plates that I made of the plaintiff and correctly portray that part of the anatomy of the plaintiff which they pur- 178 port to show. Documents marked Plaintiff's Exhibits 2, 3, 4, and 5 for identification of fered and received without objection as Plain tiff's exhibits 2, 3, 4, and 5. Exhibit No. 3 179 represents an anterior-posterior view, or view directly in front of the patient, of the entire skull, and including the sinuses and including the mandible and the cervicle spine. This film shows the whole depressed frag ment of bone as well as the inner and outer table and the depressed skull fracture of the 180 inner and outer table but also an area of lo calized scar tissue. Exhibit No. 4 is a side view that shows the extent of the area which is depressed and is about a circular area of 44 an inch and a quarter. This view also shows the comminution. These films were taken May 4, 195} • so that the area of healing could be outlined, and an overall area of sclerotic 181 bone shown. Exhibit No. 2 is a lateral view which even from the other side of the skull, shows the hole in the head, the healed area with extra bone and extra scar tissue. I am familiar with the fair and reasonable charges that prevailed in the City of Chicago in the medical profession during the time of my treatment of the plaintiff in this case. A fair and reasonable charge for the services ren- 182 dered plaintiff is Three Hundred Fifty Dol lars and that is the amount charged the plain tiff. 182-186 (At this point Mr. McCoy formulated and directed to the witness a hypothetical ques tion based on the facts in evidence in this case. Question objected to on ground that the reference in the question to the speech im pediment was not in evidence; objection over- 187 ruled.) In my opinion there is a causal con nection between the blow received and the ill being described in the hypothetical case. In 188 my opinion the condition described, in the hy pothetical case is permanent. I still have the plaintiff under observation to make sure that local brain pressure does not give him other complications like convulsions. Cross Examination by Mr. Hartigan 189 I last examined the plaintiff about five min utes before we started. Prior to that my last 45 examination was last week. Before that, I last examined him three weeks previously. The X-rays were taken May 4, 1951. (Plaintiff rests) (Which was all the testimony offered in this cause) 192 Affidavit of Alma G. Parker, a court re porter, that she reported the testimony and proceedings in shorthand at the trial of this cause, and that the foregoing is a true and correct transcript of her shorthand notes so taken and contains all the testimony taken at said trial. MOTION FOR DIRECTED VERDICT 193 And thereupon, the defendant, by its attor neys, at the close of all the evidence in the case, presented to the Court its motion in writing and instruction in writing for directed verdict in favor of the defendant, in words and figures following, to-wit (omitting caption and title of Court clause): And now comes the defendant, City of Chi cago, by John J. Mortimer, its attorney, at the close of all the evidence for the plaintiff and move the Court to exclude from the jury all the evidence offered and received on the part and behalf of said plaintiff, and to give to said jury the following instruction, viz: The Court instructs the jury to find the defendant, City of Chicago, not guilty. Attorney for defendant City of Chicago. (Motion sustained and granted). 46 194 195 (Instruction) The Court instructs the jury to find the defendant, City of Chicago, not guilty, (Given) And which said motion was by the Court then and there sustained and granted and the Court then and there gave the said instruction. And thereupon, afterwards, to wit: on the 24th day of April, 1953, the jury returned a verdict in this cause finding the defendant, City of Chicago, not guilty. And afterwards, and within ten days after return of said verdict, as aforesaid, to-wit: on the 30th day of April, 1953, the plaintiff, by his attorney, filed in said cause his motion for a new trial in this cause, in words and figures following, to-wit: State Of Illinois ) ) SS: County Of Cook ) In The Circuit Court Of Cook County Wilbert K. Slaton, Plaintiff, -v s - City Of Chicago, a Municipal Corporation, ) Defendant. ) MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL, ) ) ) No. 48 C 8797 ) Now comes Wilbert K. Slaton, plaintiff in the above entitled cause, by his attorney, Fleetwood M. McCoy, and moves that the 47 - directed verdict by the jury in said cause be set aside and that the judgment heretofore en tered on said verdict be vacated and set aside and that a new trial be granted to the plaintiff, and for reasons of said motion states the fol lowing: 1. The verdict is clearly and palpably against the weight of the evidence. 2. The directed verdict is contrary to law. 3. The directed verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence. 4. The Court erred in refusing to admit proper and legal evidence offered on behalf of the plaintiff. 5. The Court erred in giving to the jury improper instruction on behalf of the defend ant. 6. There is no sufficient or substantial evidence tending to support the verdict of the jury. 7. The Court erred in refusing to require defendant to move forward with its evidence, if any, at the close of the plaintiff's case. 8. The Court erred in refusing to submit the case to the jury for its consideration at the close of the plaintiff's evidence. 9. The Court erred in refusing to give to the jury proper instructions submitted by the plaintiff. / s / Fleetwood M. McCoy Attorney for Plaintiff 197 And afterwards, to-wit: on the 11th day of November, 1953, the Court having considered the said motion of the plaintiff for a new trial. 48 said motion was in all things by the Court overruled and denied. 198 Forasmuch as the matters and things here inabove set forth do not otherwise appear of record, the defendant herein tenders this, a full, true and complete Report of all Proceed ings had and all evidence offered, taken and admitted, and all rulings thereon in the above- entitled cause, and asks that the same be cer tified, signed, sealed and filed and made a part of the record herein. The undersigned, trial judge in the above- entitled cause, hereby certifies that the above and foregoing Report of Proceedings is a full, true and complete report of all proceedings had and all evidence offered, taken and ad mitted and all rulings thereon made in the above entitled cause and is a correct report of all proceedings had in the above entitled cause, and is accordingly signed, sealed and made a part of the record in the above en titled cause and ordered filed on this 19th day of February, 1954. John T. Dempsey (Seal) Trial Judge 200 Certificate of Clerk to transcript of record, per praecipe. Dated the 25th day of February, 1954, and signed by the Clerk, under seal of the Court. Fleetwood M. McCoy, and, Moore, Ming & Leighton, Attorneys for Appellant. Fleetwood M. McCoy, William R. Ming, Jr., George N. Leighton, and Walter K. Black, Of Counsel* i s