Knight v. Cont'l Auto. Mfg. Co.
| Decision Date | 20 July 1909 |
| Citation | 73 A. 751,82 Conn. 291 |
| Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
| Parties | KNIGHT v. CONTINENTAL AUTOMOBILE MFG. CO. |
Appeal from Superior Court, New Haven County; William S. Case, Judge.
Action by John H. Knight against the Continental Automobile Manufacturing Company to recover for injuries caused by the negligence of defendant's servants in the operation of an automobile. From a judgment for plaintiff, and from the denial of a motion to set aside the verdict, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
C. S. Hamilton, for appellant.
David E. Fitzgerald and Walter J. Walsh, for appellee.
The plaintiff introduced evidence to prove: That on the 5th day of July, d907, after 9 o'clock in the evening, he was the conductor of an open trolley car that ran between Savin Rock and Mt. Carmel. While he was on the running board of the car, and engaged in issuing transfers to the passengers of the car, he was suddenly struck by a part of an automobile driven in the opposite direction to that in which the car was proceeding. The automobile was operated by the defendant's servant, while acting within the actual course of his employment. The trolley car was well lighted, and the chauffeur saw it when he was some distance away. There was ample room on both sides of the approaching car in which the driver of the automobile could have turned and avoided striking the plaintiff. On the outside of the body of the automobile was an iron hook used for the purpose of holding the top of the automobile up in position. This hook struck the plaintiff as the two vehicles passed, tearing his coat, trousers, and his underclothing, and causing a deep gash or wound in his leg, throwing him to the ground, and rendering him unconscious.
The duty and power of a trial judge in respect to a verdict rendered by a jury having been so fully explained by several recent decisions of this court, we are not disposed to make any extended review of the law applicable in the present case. The evidence reported is sufficient to sustain the verdict for the plaintiff upon the question of negligence; the defendant's main contention being that the verdict was excessive. In this class of cases the damages cannot be computed by mathematical calculation, and the law furnishes no precise or definite rule for their assessment, which is peculiarly within the province of the jury. Clark v. Pendleton, 20 Conn. 495, 509; Shaw v. Pope, 80 Conn. 206, 211, 67 Atl. 495.
It would be competent for the court...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Birgel v. Heintz
...Russakoff v. Stamford, 134 Conn. 450, 455, 58 A.2d 517; Samaha v. Mauro, 104 Conn. 300, 302, 132 A. 455; Knight v. Continental Automobile Mfg. Co., 82 Conn. 291, 293, 73 A. 751.' Lopez v. Price, supra, 145 Conn. 569, 145 A.2d 132. The final assignment of error relates to the claim that the ......
-
Wochek v. Foley
...Stamford, 134 Conn. 450, 455, 58 A.2d 517 [1948]; Samaha v. Mauro, 104 Conn. 300, 302, 132 A. 455 [1926]; Knight v. Continental Automobile Mfg. Co., 82 Conn. 291, 293, 73 A. 751 [1909]. The only practical test to apply to a verdict is whether the award of damages falls somewhere within the ......
-
Langs v. Harder
...v. Price, 145 Conn. 560, 569, 145 A.2d 127, 132; Russakoff v. Stamford, 134 Conn. 450, 455, 58 A.2d 517; Knight v. Continental Automobile Mfg. Co., 82 Conn. 291, 293, 73 A. 751. It can be argued that the theory of 'making whole' was established essentially for the guidance of a jury or cour......
-
Bodzon v. Beaudoin, No. CV 03 0519314 S (Conn. Super. 5/19/2006)
...Stamford, 134 Conn. 450, 455, 58 A.2d 517 [1948]; Samaha v. Mauro, 104 Conn. 300, 302, 132 A. 455 [1926]; Knight v. Continental Automobile Mfg. Co., 82 Conn. 291, 293, 73 A. 751 [1909]. The only practical test to apply to a verdict is whether the award of damages falls somewhere within the ......