Beaton v. City of St. Maries

• Decision Date: 22 June 1915
• Citation: 27 Idaho 638,151 P. 996
• Parties: ANNA BEATON and JOHN BEATON, Her Husband, Respondents, v. CITY OF ST. MARIES, a Municipal Corporation, Appellant
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court

151 P. 996

27 Idaho 638

ANNA BEATON and JOHN BEATON, Her Husband, Respondents, v. CITY OF ST. MARIES, a Municipal Corporation, Appellant

Supreme Court of Idaho

June 22, 1915

PERSONAL INJURIES-MEASURE OF DAMAGE.

1. The right to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by a fall caused by a defective sidewalk is based upon the principle that the person injured should receive full compensation for the loss sustained with the least possible burden to the party responsible for the injury.

2. Although the amount of recovery is largely within the discretion of the jury, the verdict must be based upon the evidence, and when it is apparent therefrom that the recovery is in excess of the actual loss sustained, the judgment must be modified or vacated.

APPEAL from the District Court of the Eighth Judicial District for Kootenai County. Hon. William W. Woods, Presiding Judge.

Action for damages for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiffs. Reversed conditionally.

Costs upon appeal are awarded to the appellant. Petition for rehearing denied.

Taylor & Hull and McFarland & McFarland, for Appellant.

The damages awarded by the jury in this case are excessive, as respondent did not suffer any permanent or even serious injuries, and her age would preclude the recovery of any such sum of money awarded by the verdict. (Muskogee Electric Traction Co. v. Mueller, 39 Okla. 63, 134 P. 51; Hase v. City of Seattle, 57 Wash. 230, 107 P. 515; Heath v. Seattle Taxicab Co., 73 Wash. 177, 131 P 843; McCabe v. City of Butte, 46 Mont. 65, 125 P 133; Chicago W. D. Ry. Co. v. Hughes, 87 Ill. 94; Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Survant, 96 Ky. 197, 27 S.W. 999.)

John P Gray, Frank McCarthy and W. D. Keeton, for Respondents.

The damages awarded were not excessive. (Hinton v. Cream City R. Co., 65 Wis. 323, 27 N.W. 147; Texas P. Ry. Co v. Davidson, 68 Tex. 370, 4 S.W. 636; Johnson v. St. Paul City Ry. Co., 67 Minn. 260, 69 N.W. 900, 36 L. R. A. 586; Keim v. Gilmore & Pittsburg R. R. Co., 23 Idaho 511, 131 P. 656.)

MORGAN, J. Sullivan, C. J., and Budge, J., concur.

OPINION

MORGAN, J.

This is an action prosecuted by respondents, Anna Beaton and John Beaton, her husband, for damages for personal injuries sustained by her by a fall, due to a defective sidewalk within the corporate limits of the city of St. Maries, appellant herein. The trial resulted in a judgment in favor of respondents for $ 5,100, from which and from an order overruling a motion for a new trial this appeal has been taken.

Appellant has assigned as error the action of the trial judge in overruling certain objections to questions propounded to witnesses at the trial and in sustaining others; in admitting certain documentary evidence and in refusing to admit as evidence a proffered affidavit; in denying appellant's application for a new trial; also that the evidence is insufficient to justify the verdict, and that excessive damages appear to have been allowed under the influence of passion or prejudice.

Our examination of the record convinces us that the trial judge committed no error in his rulings as to the admissibility of the proof offered, and, since said rulings are based upon well-established principles of law, we will not indulge in a discussion of the assignments of error predicated upon them.

We are convinced that the judgment in this case is excessive. It appears that on the evening of December 24, 1913, the respondent, Anna Beaton, while on her way from her home in St. Maries to the business section of the city, accompanied by her daughter, Mrs. Scott, and when at a point on Center street about six blocks from her home and about ten blocks from the business section, stepped into a hole or depression in the sidewalk caused by two boards being broken, and fell; that no bones were broken but that her left shoulder was severely bruised; that she continued her trip to the business section of the city and, according to her testimony, her shoulder felt numb, and while she was in the business district she was taken sick and felt faint, but that with the assistance of her daughter she walked home and that she was confined to her bed over a month and to the house for about three months. She testified that she called a physician on the second day after the accident, she thought, but the physician testified, refreshing his memory from his book, that he was first called on January 4th, which was the eleventh day after the accident.

According to Mrs. Beaton's testimony, she had not fully recovered the use of her left arm at the time of the trial, which took place nearly a year after the injury was sustained. In this she was corroborated by certain witnesses, including her physician, who testified that, in his opinion, she will never fully recover. She was contradicted by other witnesses who testified to having seen her attending to her ordinary household duties, including laundry work, at which she used both hands, and that she was apparently sound and well since shortly after the accident, including a part of the time she testified to having been confined to the house. Two...