Hauser v. Griffith

• Decision Date: 15 May 1897
• Citation: 71 N.W. 223,102 Iowa 215
• Parties: THEOBALD HAUSER v. A. P. GRIFFITH, Appellant
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

71 N.W. 223

102 Iowa 215

THEOBALD HAUSER v. A. P. GRIFFITH, Appellant

Supreme Court of Iowa, Des Moines

May 15, 1897

Appeal from Bremer District Court.--HON. J. C. SHERWIN, Judge.

ACTION for damages for an assault and battery. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

G. W Ruddick for appellant.

Gibson & Dawson for appellee.

OPINION

GRANGER, J.

I.

The allegations are. that the injuries were caused by kicking and by beating and bruising with the fist. The court permitted the plaintiff to show, against objection, that his wife was living at the time of the injury, and was not living at the time of the trial. Complaint is made of the ruling. As the record appears in this court, the facts are immaterial. Appellee, in argument, says it was done to account for her absence as a witness, because she would have been a material witness as to plaintiff's condition after the injury. The difficulty in that respect is that the record does not show the fact of her knowledge on that subject. The abstract does not purport to contain all the evidence, but it does purport to contain all the evidence pertaining to each and every question presented by the assignment of errors, and necessary to a proper consideration of them, and each of them. The abstract is not questioned, and hence it is taken as true. Therefore we must hold the evidence to be immaterial. When we take into consideration the record as presented, and assume as we may, the ordinary intelligence of the jury, it may be said to appear that no prejudice resulted. If there were facts with which to associate the particular evidence, to give it significance or bearing on either a right of recovery or the amount thereof, they are not in the record, and we cannot assume them. The absence of conditions from which prejudice might arise justifies a conclusion that there was no prejudice.

II. The defendant had been accused on information of the crime of an assault and battery, and had pleaded guilty thereto. That plea was put in evidence on this trial, of which complaint is made. It is thought, because of some language in Crawford v. Bergen, 91 Iowa 675 (60 N.W. 205), that the authorities are not in harmony as to the admissibility of such a plea in evidence, in a civil suit like this. The holding in that case is that the effect of such a plea, when put in evidence, is not conclusive as to the fact of guilt but that the party may show, in the civil suit for damages, that he was not in fact guilty. This holding is immediately followed by the language on which reliance is placed, as follows: "The admission of guilt should be held to apply to that trial only, because the parties are not the same, and the rules of practice and course of proceeding are different." The meaning is this: By the plea in the criminal suit there was an admission of guilt that was conclusive in that...