Pihsiou Hsu v. Mound Yellow Cab Co., 42651
| Decision Date | 25 August 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 42651,42651 |
| Citation | 624 S.W.2d 61 |
| Parties | PIHSIOU HSU, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MOUND CITY YELLOW CAB COMPANY, Defendant-Respondent. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
William R. Hirsch, Clayton, for plaintiff-appellant.
Mark R. Henry, Clayton, for defendant-respondent.
In an action to recover damages allegedly caused by defendant's negligence, the plaintiff received a jury verdict of $50,000. The defendant's motion for a new trial was sustained, and from this order the plaintiff appeals.
On the evening of July 5, 1977, plaintiff was a passenger in the rear seat of a companion's car when it was struck from the rear by defendant's taxicab. Upon impact, the plaintiff was thrown into the front seat of the car and then thrust backward. Immediately following the accident, plaintiff complained of dizziness. Upon returning home that evening, plaintiff experienced headaches, back pains, and a sore neck. As her condition worsened the next day, plaintiff went to Barnes Hospital to receive emergency medical treatment. At the hospital, plaintiff was x-rayed, given medication, and advised by a doctor to get some rest. On July 8, plaintiff returned to the emergency room of Barnes Hospital as an out-patient complaining of continued ill health. On July 11, plaintiff met with Dr. Ratchinson, a neurosurgeon, who suggested that she return to her home in Washington, D.C. to recuperate. Subsequently, plaintiff was under the care of another neurosurgeon in Washington for approximately one year. During this time, plaintiff was hospitalized for one month at the George Washington University Hospital, where a myelogram and x-rays were taken. Following her hospitalization plaintiff received rehabilitation therapy and chiropractic treatment. As a result of the injuries she sustained in the collision with defendant, plaintiff alleges that she has been physically impaired, prevented from pursuing her academic aspirations, and unable to work in a normal capacity.
In sustaining defendant's motion, the trial court ordered a new trial because: 1) there was insufficient evidence to show a direct causal relationship between the collision and the physical injuries alleged by the plaintiff; 2) there was insufficient evidence to show that the medical and hospital bills were necessary for treatment of plaintiff's alleged injuries; and 3) the withdrawal instruction proffered by the defendant should have been given to the jury instructing them to disregard plaintiff's medical expenses since neither causation of her injuries nor necessity of the medical treatment were proved.
A trial court is "vested with broad discretionary authority to grant a new trial for errors which affect the determination of issues of fact." Fischer v. Famous-Barr Company, 618 S.W.2d 446 (Mo.App.1981). In reviewing a trial court's order for a new trial, the appellate court must only determine if there has been a clear abuse of discretion in granting the motion. Fischer, supra.
In order to make a submissible case, it is incumbent upon the plaintiff to show that the negligent actions of the defendant were the proximate cause of her injuries. Bertram v. Wunning, 385 S.W.2d 803 (Mo.App.1965). Plaintiff asserts that the trial court abused its discretion in ordering a new trial because sufficient evidence was presented at trial to establish a causal connection between the collision and the injuries she allegedly sustained. We disagree. The evidence at trial tends to show that after the collision with defendant's taxicab, plaintiff complained of dizziness, headaches, and pains throughout the upper body. The primary evidence establishing a nexus between the collision and the plaintiff's complaints is the subjective testimony of the plaintiff. Although the evidence at trial establishes that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lidge v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
...will not suffice in proving the existence or nature of an alleged injury which is not readily discernable. Pihsiou Hsu v. Mound City Yellow Cab Co., 624 S.W.2d 61, 63 (Mo.Ct.App.1981). In Williams v. Jacobs, 972 S.W.2d 334 (Mo.Ct.App.1998), the plaintiff's car was "tapped" by the defendant'......
-
Harris v. Washington, 45856
...submissible case, plaintiff must show that defendant's negligence was the proximate cause of her injuries. Pihsiou Hsu v. Mound City Yellow Cab Co., 624 S.W.2d 61, 63 (Mo.App.1981). Plaintiff has the burden to show by substantial evidence, the causal connection between defendant's negligenc......
-
Farkas v. Addition Mfg. Techs., LLC, 4:17-CV-761 RLW
...or nature of an alleged injury which is not readily discernable." Lidge, 318 F. Supp. 2d at 836 (citing Pihsiou Hsu v. Mound City Yellow Cab Co., 624 S.W.2d 61, 63 (Mo. Ct. App. 1981)). The Court holds testimony regarding the serious and immediate damage to Farkas' fingers and hand are cove......
-
Williams v. Jacobs
...indefinite for a jury to determine whether the alleged injuries were caused by defendant's negligence." Pihsiou Hsu v. Mound City Yellow Cab Co., 624 S.W.2d 61, 63 (Mo.App.1981). In Pihsiou Hsu, the court held that "[e]vidence of medical expenses and subjective complaints of pain will not s......