Strange v. Ardison

• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: Sutton
• Citation: Strange v. Ardison, 65 S.W.2d 115 (Mo. App. 1933)
• Decision Date: 05 December 1933
• Docket Number: No. 22467.,22467.
• Parties: STRANGE v. ARDISON.

65 S.W.2d 115

STRANGE v. ARDISON.

No. 22467.

St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.

December 5, 1933.

Rehearing Denied December 19, 1933.

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; Granville Hogan, Judge.

"Not to be published in State Reports."

Action by H. M. Strange, an infant, by Edward Strange, his next friend, against Lawrence Ardison. From a judgment for plaintiff, he appeals, urging the inadequacy of the verdict.

Reversed and remanded.

Everett Hullverson and Staunton E. Boudreau, both of St. Louis, for appellant.

Charles Straub and Walter L. Brady, both of St. Louis, for respondent.

SUTTON, Commissioner.

This is an action for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff, on January 12, 1931, in a collision between his automobile and defendant's automobile. The collision occurred on what is known as the Free Bridge over the Mississippi river in the city of St. Louis. The chief injury sustained by plaintiff, for which he sues, was a skull fracture. The trial was had with a jury on March 22, 1932, and resulted in a verdict and judgment in favor of plaintiff for $500. Plaintiff appeals.

Plaintiff urges a reversal here for the inadequacy of the verdict. It becomes necessary, therefore, to set out in some detail the testimony respecting the nature and extent of plaintiff's injuries.

Plaintiff testified: "I am eighteen years old. I reside at 722 Market Avenue, East St. Louis. I attend Washington University, where I am taking a chemical engineering course. I have been attending Washington University since the last school opening, September, 1931. I went to high school in East St. Louis prior to that time. On January 12, 1931, at 11:20 or 11:30 p. m., while driving my automobile east on the Free Bridge about three to five feet from the south curb and at about fifteen to twenty miles per hour, I saw, upon coming out of the curve on the bridge, defendant's automobile coming westwardly fast and about seventy-five to one hundred feet away and in about the center of the driveway on the bridge. I cut over to the south curb to get as much out of his way as possible, so that my car got within a foot or a foot and a half of the south curb. When my car was about ten or fifteen feet out of the curve and on the straightaway, defendant's automobile struck the left rear end of mine. I do not know what happened thereafter, as I lost consciousness. I became conscious about four or five days later. I was in the City Hospital. I stayed in the City Hospital a week before I was taken home. While I was in the City Hospital I had terrible pains in my head, and my back was sore. After I was taken home, I remained in bed about two weeks and then just lay around the house for a while. I was able to go back to high school, where I was taking a postgraduate course, about February 5th. I did not take the full course as I did not take anything besides the studies I was taking. I suppose about two hours at school each day, one before the lunch period and one after. I did not do any work before I returned to school. I have headaches almost every day. Sometimes these headaches last me all day, but generally they start in the afternoon and last a couple of hours. I still have that trouble. I am not able to study at night any. It seems like the electric lights reflect on the pages and it blurs and hurts my eyes and head, and I have headaches. I never had any trouble with my eyes before. My health was all right before this accident. I go to Dr. Stines, who is on the East side, and Dr. Reilly. Nothing occurred prior to this accident to injure me in any way. I was examined by Dr. Farrel for the defendant in this case. Quite a few times this summer I had vomiting spells, and in the mornings when I get up I feel dizzy, and as I bend over rather suddenly to lace up my shoes or something on that order, everything goes black in front of me. I have to catch myself at something to retain my balance. This condition is more noticeable in hot weather. In the mornings when I get up I have to be rather careful how I walk around for a while. It seems like if I happen to turn one of my legs wrong it hurts my back. A few times I noticed that when I was walking along the street, especially around in hot weather, that things would go black and I would have to hold on to something. On such occasions I did not lose consciousness entirely. When I came to, I felt real hot and dizzy. I never had any of those things occur to me at any time before this accident. I went to high school from February 5, 1931, until I concluded my postgraduate course, but did not go regularly, I think only two or three hours a day and missing quite a few days."

Dr. J. J. Merz testified, for plaintiff, as follows: "I was on duty in the City Hospital the night plaintiff was admitted, and I saw him when he came in. When he came in he was unconscious, was bleeding from the nose and had lacerations on the back of his head; both eyes were swollen; there were large blood clots along both eyes, and there was a general abrasion of the whole body. He was vomiting. His pulse was fast, and his blood pressure low. My provisional diagnosis of his condition based on the condition I just described, his vomiting and fast pulse, was that he was suffering from a probable fracture of the skull. He was taken to the X-ray room where X-ray pictures were taken, and then sent up to the ward where his scalp was sewed. The X-ray pictures show a linear fracture of the skull in the parietal region beginning at the posterior position of the bone and extending downward to the temporal bone. There were several X-ray pictures taken. Plaintiff had a fracture in his skull about an inch or an inch and a half in length. The fracture of the skull caused his unconsciousness. Underneath the skull there are, first, a membranous coating, the meninges, then a layer of fluid, then two more layers of meninges, then the brain substance itself. A blow sufficient to crack a person's skull is sufficient to cause an injury to the brain. The serious thing about a skull fracture is not the crack in the bone itself, but the resultant injury to the brain. An X-ray picture shows the fracture of the skull, but not what damage has been done to the brain, because the X-rays go right through the brain. In my opinion it is very probable that this boy will suffer from pain from his injury in the future. If a person has suffered a brain injury and a skull fracture, he is very restless and irritable. The City Hospital reports show that plaintiff was restless and irritable, and refused food; that there were periods when he would sleep, and then upon awakening be restless and irritable again; that is the normal course and conduct after skull fracture. In my opinion it is probable that this boy may suffer from pain from his injury in the future. Plaintiff entered the hospital at 11:40 p. m. He became conscious about 4:30 in the morning. He was rational, but very unpleasant. An injury to the brain is indicated by the various symptoms I spoke of a while ago, low blood pressure and fast pulse, his shock and temperature, and reflexes. When plaintiff came into the hospital that night he surely showed symptoms of brain injury, and these symptoms persisted after that. The fracture or cracking of the outer layer of the skull in itself does not mean anything unless the injury goes into the brain. Plaintiff suffered a fracture of both tables of the skull, the outer and the inner, and there were symptoms of injury to the brain."

Dr. L. R. Sante testified, for plaintiff, as follows: "I have charge of the X-rays in St. Louis City Hospital, St. Mary's Hospital, and Elizabeth Hospital. I made X-ray pictures of the plaintiff in this case. The pictures show a linear fracture of the right parietal region in the...