Weber v. Young
| Decision Date | 08 April 1947 |
| Citation | 250 Wis. 307,26 N.W.2d 543 |
| Parties | WEBER v. YOUNG. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Milwaukee County; Daniel W. Sullivan, Judge.
Reversed.
Action begun November 6, 1943, by Paul Weber against Dr. Albert F. Young for damages for false imprisonment. From an order sustaining plaintiff's demurrer to the answer of the defendant, defendant appeals.
On May 19, 1928, plaintiff was found to be feebleminded. He was committed to the Milwaukee County Hospital for Chronic Insane by the district court of Milwaukee county. At that time, as now, the statutes (sec. 52.01 and sec. 52.02) provided that feeble-minded persons should be committed to the Northern Wisconsin Colony and Training School near Chippewa Falls or to the Southern Wisconsin Colony and Training School near Union Grove. Sec. 52.03(2) further provided, ‘Whenever any person shall be committed to either of said institutions, and such institution shall be filled to its capacity, the board of control may transfer such person to the other institution, or, if both institutions are filled, to a county asylum for the chronic insane.’
Upon a rehearing fifteen years later plaintiff was discharged as of October 20, 1943.
Defendant was appointed acting superintendant of the Milwaukee County Hospital for Chronic Insane in 1937 and served in that capacity until December 31, 1938. His predecessors in that office are no longer living. He is charged with false imprisonment of plaintiff.
Plaintiff contends that because he was not committed in the first instance to either of the Colony and Training schools in accordance with the provisions of the statutes, his commitment to the Milwaukee County Hospital for Chronic Insane was void on its face. He further contends that defendant knew, or should have known, that he, defendant, had no right to keep plaintiff confined in the county hospital. In his answer the defendant alleges that at no time was his attention called to anything that might indicate irregularity in the original commitment. He also alleges that he is informed and believes that prior to the time of plaintiff's commitment, the then State Board of Control, now known as the State Department of Public Welfare, issued a directive that until further notice commitments of feeble-minded of Milwaukee county were to be made directly to Milwaukee County Hospital for Chronic Insane because of the congested condition in both the Northern and Southern Colony and Training Schools.
In sustaining the demurrer to defendant's answer, the trial court held that neither the defendant's lack of information about the irregularity of the commitment nor the State Board of Control's directive constituted a defense to the charge of false imprisonment.
William J. McCauley, Dist. Atty., and Oliver L. O'Boyle, Corporation Counsel, both of Milwaukee, for appellant.
Raymond J. Cannon and John L. Newman, both of Milwaukee, for respondent.
The most that can be said against the form of plaintiff's commitment to the Milwaukee County Hospital for Chronic Insane is that upon its face it does not disclose an exact and literal following of the wording of sec. 52.03(2), Stats.1927. The statute provided for the commitment of feeble-minded persons to either of two state institutions and for their transfer by the State Board of Control (Department of Public Welfare) to county hospitals when the state Colony and Training Schools were crowded. It appears from the pleadings that both state institutions were congested in 1928 and that the State Board of Control had directed that feeble-minded persons from Milwaukee county be sent to the Milwaukee County Hospital for Chronic Insane. This directive accomplished the very purpose of the transfer by the State Board of Control provided for in the statute. At any rate, the court did no more than commit plaintiff directly to the institution to which he would have been transferred. The evident purposes of Chapter 52 of the Statutes were served, and the commitment cannot be said to be void or so irregular as to justify sustaining a charge of false imprisonment.
The statute does provide that ‘whenever any person shall be committed’ to either of said institutions, and such shall be filled to capacity, the ‘board...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lane v. Collins
...Co. (1926), 189 Wis. 554, 557, 208 N.W. 599; Hadler v. Rhyner (1944), 244 Wis. 448, 452, 12 N.W.2d 693; Weber v. Young (1947), 250 Wis. 307, 311, 26 N.W.2d 543; also see Prosser on Torts (3d ed.), p. 54, sec. 12; 22 Am.Jur., False Imprisonment, p. 353, sec. 22.2 Zartner v. Scopp (1965), 28 ......
-
Laska v. Steinpreis
...38 Wis.2d 564, 566, 157 N.W.2d 619, 621, citing Lane v. Collins (1965), 29 Wis.2d 66, 69, 138 N.W.2d 264, and Weber v. Young (1947), 250 Wis. 307, 311, 26 N.W.2d 543.27 Id. 38 Wis.2d at page 568, 157 N.W.2d 619.28 Piorkowski v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. (1975), Wis., 228 N.W.2d 695, this court ......
-
Strong v. City of Milwaukee
...by one person of the physical liberty of another.' Lane v. Collins (1965), 29 Wis.2d 66, 69, 138 N.W.2d 264, 266; Weber v. Young (1947), 250 Wis. 307, 311, 26 N.W.2d 543. The plaintiff contends, and the trial court concluded, that the false imprisonment alleged in the complaint was not an i......
- Zande v. Better Farms, Inc.