Askam v. Platt

• Decision Date: 13 June 1912
• Citation: 85 Conn. 448,83 A. 529
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: ASKAM v. PLATT et al.

83 A. 529

85 Conn. 448

ASKAM v. PLATT et al.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

June 13, 1912

Appeal from Superior Court, New Haven County; William L. Bennett Judge.

Action by William F. Askam against Arthur J. Platt and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Robert C. Stoddard, of New Haven, for appellant.

Charles S. Hamilton and Omar W. Platt, both of New Haven, for appellees.

RORABACK, J.

The essential allegations of the complaint are as follows: " (2) On or about the 18th day of February, 1910, the plaintiff bought of the defendants certain meat known as pork or pork chops, for the purpose of using the same immediately as food for himself and family, and the defendants sold this meat to the plaintiff knowing that the same was to be used by the plaintiff and his family as food. (3) The defendants sold this meat with the implied guaranty that the same was fit and wholesome for food. (4) Said meat was not fit and wholesome for food, but was diseased and liable to cause illness and sickness to any person who ate the same. (5) Upon the delivery of said meat to the plaintiff's family, said meat was within a reasonable time thereafter prepared and consumed by the plaintiff and his family. *** (7) As a result of eating said meat, the plaintiff, his wife, and his minor children were made sick." The answer admitted paragraph 2, denied paragraphs 3, 4, 5, and 7; and also alleged that the plaintiff selected the meat in question and in so doing relied upon his own skill and judgment.

On the trial the plaintiff in the presentation of his case offered no evidence to prove that he had purchased and eaten any meat of any kind from the defendants except 4 3/4 pounds of pork chops, bought on the 7th day of February, 1910. After the close of the plaintiff's case the defendants in reply with other testimony, offered witnesses who testified as to the purchase of sausages by the plaintiff on the 5th, 8th, and 11th days of February, 1910, and of pork chops on the 12th day of February, 1910.

In his charge the court, in speaking of the issues presented for the consideration of the jury, used the following language " The parties are very much in controversy upon this part of the case, and I ought here to say to you, before I go any further, that the plaintiffs have put up their cases to you, in the opening, upon the ground that they bought pork chops upon a certain day, and that their damage resulted from eating those pork chops. Now, that is their case, and that case they must prove. Yon cannot bring in a verdict against the defendants unless the plaintiffs have proven that those pork chops concerning which they gave evidence in the opening of their case were infected with trichinae , as they claim them to have been. It will not do, and you cannot, even if you should find that the defendants sold other pork products or other pork,...