Rasmussen v. Milwaukee Elec. Ry. & Transport Co.

Decision Date07 May 1952
Citation261 Wis. 579,53 N.W.2d 442
PartiesRASMUSSEN, v. MILWAUKEE ELECTRIC RAILWAY & TRANSPORT CO. et al.
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court

Action by Virginia Rasmussen to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by her in a collision between a cab operated by the Checker Cab Company, in which she was a passenger, with a streetcar of The Milwaukee Electric Railway and Transport Company. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff against both defendants and assessed her damages at the sum of $36,829. Upon motions after verdict the defendants were granted a new trial as to the damages only, unless the plaintiff elected to take judgment in the sum of $24,800 plus her costs and disbursements. Plaintiff elected to take the reduced amount and Judgment was entered on August 11, 1950. Separate appeals from that judgment were taken by each of the defendants. Upon that appeal this court, in its opinion and decision, reported in Rasmussen v. The Milwaukee E. R. & T. Co., 259 Wis. 130, 47 N.W.2d 730, reversed the judgment for the reason that the trial court had not specifically stated that the figure in the option granted the plaintiff was the least amount that an unprejudiced jury, properly instructed, would, under the evidence, probably assess. The cause was remanded for further proceedings, and on October 29, 1951, the trial court stated in writing that in reducing the amount of damages he did adhere to the rule. Judgment was entered on November 6, 1951, in the amount of $27,062.29 in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants. The defendants have appealed from said judgment. The material facts will be stated in the opinion.

Shaw, Muskat & Paulsen, Milwaukee, for Transport Co.

D. J. Regan, Milwaukee, for Cab Co.

Quarles, Spence & Quarles, Milwaukee, Kenneth P. Grubb and Edmund W. Powell, Milwaukee, of counsel, for respondent.

BROADFOOT, Justice.

At the time of the accident on July 3, 1947, the plaintiff was seated in the rear seat of the cab, which was struck in the back by the streetcar with such force that the rear of the cab was pushed in eighteen inches to two feet. The plaintiff was thrown about in the cab and was rendered unconscious. Between the date of the accident and the date of the trial in May, 1950, the plaintiff was treated by a number of doctors, and prior to the trial she was examined by other doctors for the defendants.

There is, of course, some dispute as to the extent of her disability. However, the record clearly establishes that she received serious injuries and that she suffered some permanent disability, with ample medical testimony that her injuries and permanent disability are attributable to the accident. There is evidence in the record of shock and brain concussion; rigidity and spasm in the neck muscles and in the lower back; limitation of motion in the neck; a slight curvature of the cervical spine to the right; some loss of sensation in the right arm and part of the fingers of the right hand; the seventh cervical vertebra is farther forward than normal on the first dorsal vertebra; narrowing of the intervertebral space at the fifth lumbar vertebra; limitation of motion of the hips and trunk; altered sensation in the right leg; and limitation of motion on straight leg raising.

Prior to the accident the plaintiff had done work of various kinds, particularly cooking and baking, and work in a delicatessen and restaurant. She testified that this was the type of work she wanted to do in the future. As a result of her disabilities she cannot do work that involves bending or lifting, or work that requires turning her head or being on her feet all day. She is not totally disabled, and is able to do some work. However, the record shows that her wages in the future will be diminished because of her partial disability. She had suffered considerable pain and she will have future pain.

The defendants contend that some of plaintiff's disabilities are, or could have been, caused otherwise...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Leliefeld v. Panorama Contractors, Inc.
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • January 16, 1986
    ...Goelzer, 191 Wis. 378, 211 N.W. 140 (1926); Fehrman v. Smirl, 25 Wis.2d 645, 131 N.W.2d 314 (1964); Rasmussen v. Milwaukee Electric Ry. & Transport Co., 261 Wis. 579, 53 N.W.2d 442 (1952); and Moldenhauer v. Faschingbauer, 33 Wis.2d 617, 148 N.W.2d 112 "In Zeidler the plaintiff was injured ......
  • Nelson v. Travelers Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Supreme Court
    • June 2, 1981
    ...Goelzer, 191 Wis. 378, 211 N.W. 140 (1926); Fehrman v. Smirl, 25 Wis.2d 645, 131 N.W.2d 314 (1964); Rasmussen v. Milwaukee Electric Ry. & Transport Co., 261 Wis. 579, 53 N.W.2d 442 (1952); and Moldenhauer v. Faschingbauer, 33 Wis.2d 617, 148 N.W.2d 112 In Zeidler the plaintiff was injured w......
  • Hallada v. Great Northern Ry.
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • February 25, 1955
    ...Unless the mandate of the appellate court clearly excludes such interest. See, M.S.A. § 549.09; Rasmussen v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Transport Co., 261 Wis. 579, 53 N.W.2d 442; Piper v. Epstein, 326 Ill.App. 400, 62 N.E.2d 139; Palmer v. Bank of Zumbrota, 72 Minn. 266, 75 N.W. 380; Mar......
  • Moldenhauer v. Faschingbauer
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Supreme Court
    • January 31, 1967
    ...reduced amount of the verdict upon Waterman v. Chicago & Alton R. Co. (1892), 82 Wis. 613, 52 N.W. 247, and Rasmussen v. Milwaukee E.R. & T. Co. (1952), 261 Wis. 579, 53 N.W.2d 442. In Waterman the plaintiff was given the option of remitting $5,000 of a $25,000 verdict or taking a new trial......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT