Erwin v. Milligan
| Decision Date | 22 January 1934 |
| Docket Number | 4-3301 |
| Parties | ERWIN v. MILLIGAN |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Sharp Circuit Court, Southern District; John L. Bledsoe Judge; reversed in part.
Judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Coleman & Reeder and T. J. Carter, for appellant.
John C. Ashley and Roy Prewitt, for appellee.
Suit was begun in the Sharp Circuit Court by Mrs. Noble C Milligan, appellee, against the appellant, Wade Erwin. The appellee alleged in her complaint that the appellant, Wade Erwin, came to her home in Sharp County, and, in the absence of her husband, unlawfully, wilfully and contemptuously did insult, disturb, disquiet and threaten her by the use of indecent language and proposals; that, because of said wrongful acts, words and proposals made to her by appellant, she became ill, excited and nervous; that her moral sensibilities and ideals of decency and propriety were shocked, and that she suffered, because of said acts and proposals, a nervous collapse and great pain, anguish and humiliation. She alleges that she was pregnant with child; that, because of her mental condition, nervous and physical shock brought about by the improper conduct of the appellant, she was caused to have a miscarriage, and was caused great physical pain and suffering and irreparable injury to her health; that she was confined to her bed, and forced to expend large sums for doctor's bills and medicine; that her health was permanently injured. She also alleges that, prior to the misconduct of appellant mentioned in her complaint, she was a strong healthy woman, able to do her housework and assist her husband in the fields, making and harvesting his crops; that since the acts complained of she had been nervous, irritable and unable to perform her necessary duties or assist her husband as before; that, because of said wrongful acts and proposals, she had been damaged in the sum of $ 5,000 actual damages, and in the sum of $ 2,500 punitive damages. She prays judgment in the sum of $ 7,500, and costs.
The appellee, Noble C. Milligan, also filed suit against appellant and alleged the same acts and proposals of appellant that are alleged in the complaint in the suit brought by his wife, and, in addition, alleges that he lost the services of his wife, and had to pay doctor's bills. He prays for judgment in the sum of $ 2,500.
Appellant filed answer in each case, denying all the allegations in each complaint. The two cases were consolidated and tried together.
The appellee, Mrs. Noble C. Milligan, testified that she had three children, the oldest four years of age; that she had known appellant for 15 or 16 years; that in April, 1931, he came to her home twice; that he came the second time to their home a few days later about noon; when he arrived, she testified that her husband was coming from the field; that they met and shook hands, and talked something about appellant's purchasing a tractor from her husband; that they had this talk while she was preparing dinner; that, when they had eaten, appellant and her husband talked awhile, and her husband said he had to go to the field; appellant did not make any answer; he made no attempt to get up, and her husband then said that he had to go to his mother's to get a team, and told appellant to meet him as he came back and go to the field with him, and appellant agreed. Appellant remained sitting there talking to appellee; her husband went on to the field, and, when she began to stack the dishes, appellant said: "I will give you my hand that I am your friend," and she told him she never expected him to be anything else but her friend. He then said: "I keep secrets, too," and by that time witness said appellant was reaching for her hand, and he acted as though he was going to draw her to him and kiss her. She was shocked, and told him she thought he was a Christian man; that he took hold of her right hand and she jerked back, and told him to go back where her husband was. He then asked her if he could stop as he came back by, and she told him he could not, but to go back where her husband was. He then said: "You will let me stop and be a friend to you for some money, won't you?" and she told him, if he had any money to give away, to give it to her husband. He then said: "I would rather give it to you." She testified that he asked her if she were going to tell her husband, and she said "Yes." He then said: "If you do, he might think something if you did."
This is substantially all of appellee's testimony as to what appellant said and did. She then described her shock and injury, her miscarriage and suffering, and inability to do her work.
Dr. I. M. Huskey testified that he treated Mrs. Milligan, appellee, on April 20th; that she was suffering with an abortion, and was in a serious condition. A hypothetical question was asked him, which recited the facts testified to by Mrs. Milligan, and closed as follows: "What in your judgment would be the cause of the miscarriage or abortion?" He answered that would be a sufficient cause for the abortion in the absence of any other condition in the way of disease or injury; that it would lead him to the natural conclusion that the severe mental strain of her condition would be the cause of her trouble.
There was some evidence introduced, tending to corroborate the evidence of appellee as to her illness, and all of the facts testified to in support of appellee's contention were contradicted by appellant and his witnesses.
The appellee, Noble C. Milligan, testified that he had expended $ 25 for doctor's bill. He also testified that his wife was sick and unable to do the work which she did prior to the time of appellant's alleged misconduct, but he did not testify how much work she did nor how much of her services he was deprived of by reason of her injury, and there was no testimony by any witnesses as to the value of her services.
Noble Milligan sued to recover doctor's bills, and for loss of services, and obtained a judgment for $ 125. He testified about the condition of his wife and her inability to perform the services she had been performing, but he did not testify as to any acts or words of the appellant. He could not do so because he was not present. No one testified about the acts of Erwin, except Mrs. Milligan, the wife of Noble Milligan. This evidence of Mrs. Milligan could not be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Guenther v. Griffin Constr. Co.
...above, the Arkansas Supreme Court has long delineated between the two in the context of negligence liability. See Erwin v. Milligan, 188 Ark. 658, 663, 67 S.W.2d 592 (1934) (“The rule is well established that there can be no recovery for fright or mental pain and anguish caused by negligenc......
-
Hammett v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs.
...279 Ark. 384, 397, 653 S.W.3d 128, 134 (1983). [442] Dowty v. Riggs, 2010 Ark. 465, at 7, 385 S.W.3d 117, 121 (quoting Erwin v. Milligan, 188 Ark. 658, 663, 67 S.W.2d 592, 594 (1934)). [443] Id. (quoting Chi., Rock Island & Pac. Ry. Co. v. Caple, 207 Ark. 52, 179 S.W.2d 151, 154 (1944)). [4......
-
Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Caple
... ... for humiliation and mental suffering without any physical ... injury. Such cases are Erwin v. Milligan, ... 186 Ark. 658, 67 S.W.2d 592; Rogers v ... Williard, 144 Ark. 587, 223 S.W. 15, 11 A. L. R ... 1115; Lyons v. Smith, [207 Ark ... ...
-
Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Caple
...wanton or wilful there may be a recovery for humiliation and mental suffering without any physical injury. Such cases are Erwin v. Milligan, 188 Ark. 658, 67 S.W.2d 592; Rogers v. Williard, 144 Ark. 587, 223 S.W. 15, 11 A.L.R. 1115; Lyons v. Smith, 176 Ark. 728, 3 S.W.2d 982. But the case a......