Lippitt v. Surprenant, 6859.
| Decision Date | 09 January 1931 |
| Docket Number | No. 6859.,6859. |
| Citation | 152 A. 792 |
| Parties | LIPPITT v. SURPRENANT. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
Exceptions from Superior Court, Providence and Bristol Counties; G. Frederick Frost, Judge.
Action by Gordon T. Lippitt against Eugenie Surprenant. Verdict was for plaintiff for $20,000, and the trial justice granted defendant's motion for new trial unless plaintiff remitted all of the verdict in excess of $8,000, and both parties bring exceptions.
Exceptions overruled, and case remitted.
William H. Edwards, Edward Winsor, and Edwards & Angell, all of Providence, for plaintiff.
Sherwood, Heltzen & Clifford and Sidney Clifford, all of Providence, for defendant.
This is an action of trespass on the case for negligence to recover for personal injuries to plaintiff and for expenses incurred by plaintiff for the treatment of himself and his wife and for the loss of his wife's services.
After a jury trial and a verdict for plaintiff for $20,000, the trial justice granted defendant's motion for a new trial unless the plaintiff remitted all of the verdict in excess of $S,000. Plaintiff did not file a remittitur. The case is here on bills of exceptions of both plaintiff and defendant.
The only exception of plaintiff is to the reduction of the verdict by the trial justice. The substantial exceptions of defendant are (1) to the refusal to direct a verdict for defendant; and (2) to the refusal to grant unconditionally defendant's motion for a new trial.
Defendant's principal claims are that plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence, that she herself was not negligent, to the refusal to grant a new trial without condition, and that the damages awarded are excessive.
Plaintiff and his wife were seriously injured in an automobile collision at the intersection of Boston Neck road and Beach road in Wickford. The collision occurred about 9 o'clock in the morning of July 16, 1929. Plaintiff was driving a Ford roadster southerly on the Boston road; his wife sat on the seat beside him, and their two young children were on the rumble seat behind. The Boston road is a main highway, macadamized and twenty feet wide. At the place of the accident, it runs in a straight line from north to south through a section of the country not thickly settled. Beach road is a dirt road which runs from the water front several hundred yards to the east of the Boston road in the general direction from southeast to northwest across the Boston road. Mrs. Surprenant on the morning of the accident started on a ride in a Hupmobile sedan automobile owned by her husband. After leaving the hotel on the water front where she was boarding, she drove slowly to the west on Beach road at a rate of from three to five miles an hour. She testifies that she sounded the automobile horn and stopped when she reached the Boston road intersection; that she looked to the right and to the left; she saw one automobile only on the Boston road, which was some considerable distance away and north of the intersection; she put her car into second speed, started to cross the Boston road, and almost immediately and before the front wheels of her car had reached the middle line of the Boston road plaintiff's car ran into her; defendant lost control of her owu car which ran into the automobile of a Mrs. Brown which was proceeding southerly behind plaintiff's car. The front bumper of defendant's car was broken. Defendant herself was uninjured. Mr. and Mrs. Lippitt and their children were thrown out onto the highway; their automobile was overturned; both Mr. and Mrs. Lippitt were seriously injured; each had a fractured skull and suffered other injuries. Because of a loss of memory, due to their injuries, neither plaintiff nor his wife could recall any of the incidents at the time of the collision. They now have both...
To continue reading
Request your trial