[Download] "Jewett v. Gleason" by Supreme Court of Montana ~ eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free

📘 Read Now     📥 Download

eBook details

• Title: Jewett v. Gleason
• Author : Supreme Court of Montana
• Release Date : January 08, 1937
• Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
• Pages : * pages
• Size : 60 KB

Description

Personal Injuries ? Automobile Accident at Street Crossing ? Excessive Verdict ? Reduction of Verdict ? New Trial on Refusal of Plaintiff to Accept Reduction ? Trial ? Instructions ? Unavoidable Accident ? Proper Refusal of Instruction Relating to Unavoidable Accident. Personal Injuries ? Automobile Accident at Street Crossing ? Refusal of Instruction as to Unavoidable Accident Held not Error. 1. In an action for personal injuries sustained by a pedestrian negotiating a city crosswalk, she being struck by the automobile of defendant making a left turn at the street intersection, refusal of defendants offered instruction upon the subject of unavoidable accident held not error, such an instruction being improper where the evidence shows that the accident was due to the fault or negligence of someone. Trial ? Instructions ? Charge to be Viewed as a Whole ? Refusal of Instructions on Matter Covered by Others not Error. 2. Instructions to the jury must be viewed as a whole where the giving or refusing of certain of them is relied on for reversal of the judgment; hence where the jury had been advised that the mere happening of an automobile accident does not itself entitle plaintiff to recover, refusal of one on the same subject offered by defendant was not error. Personal Injuries ? Proper Refusal of Instruction That Verdict not Predicable on Conjecture or Suspicion. 3. Where the evidence in a personal injury action, though not in accord, left but little to conjecture or suspicion but rather presented a question of credibility of the witnesses, refusal of an instruction that a verdict could only be predicated upon substantial evidence, direct or circumstantial, and not upon conjecture or suspicion, was not prejudicial error, particularly not where the subject was covered fully by general instructions given. Same ? Excessive Verdicts ? General Rule. 4. With relation to the claim of excessive verdicts in personal injury cases, there is no measuring stick by which to determine the amount of damages recoverable, other than the intelligence of the jury. Same ? Excessive Verdicts ? When Only Supreme Court will Interfere. 5. In an action for personal injuries in which the claim is made that the verdict is excessive, the supreme court will not interfere with the finding of the jury unless the result reached is such that, viewing the facts of the case in the light most favorable to plaintiff, it shocks the conscience and understanding, i.e., where the damages awarded cannot be reconciled with a conscientious interpretation of the evidence or a rational understanding of the facts as a whole. - Page 64 Same ? Excessive Verdict ? Case at Bar ? Verdict Reduced from $12,000 to $8,000 ? New Trial Ordered on Plaintiffs Refusal to Accept Reduction. 6. Plaintiff, forty-eight years of age, who, in addition to her duties of housewife, followed the avocation of saleswoman of specialties from house to house, and occasionally that of singer over the radio, in an automobile accident sustained a compression fracture of the knee testified to by the attending physician as disabling and which would probably continue for life, cuts, bruises, a sprained ankle, a fracture of the collar-bone which had healed, and others of a minor character. The knee injury was the most serious, the physician appraising it at about 50 per cent., he stating, however, that while she would have to use a cane for some time she would ultimately be able to get along without one, etc. Held that the verdict for $12,000 was excessive and reduced to $8,000, at the option of plaintiff; if reduction not accepted, new trial ordered. (MR. CHIEF JUSTICE SANDS and MR. JUSTICE ANGSTMAN dissenting.)

PDF Books "Jewett v. Gleason" Online ePub Kindle