West v. Forrest

• Decision Date: 31 January 1856
• Citation: 22 Mo. 344
• Parties: WEST and wife, Respondents, v. FORREST, Appellant.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

22 Mo. 344

WEST and wife, Respondents,

v.FORREST, Appellant.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

January Term, 1856.

1 The rejection by the court trying the cause of a competent juror is no ground for reversal in the supreme court, there being no valid objection to the jurors empannelled.

2. A party, in whipping a female slave, unintentionally but recklessly inflicted blows upon her mistress. In an action by the mistress, held, that the defendant's liability was not limited to the damages to her person; that the jury might take into consideration the mental anguish and wounded feelings of the plaintiff.

Appeal from Buchanan Court of Common Pleas.

Action for an assault and battery. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. The fourth instruction given by the court below was to the effect that the jury, in estimating the damages, if they believed the assault was ““unintentionally but recklessly committed,” might “take into consideration the pain and suffering, mental anguish and wounded feelings of the female plaintiff.”

The third instruction asked by the defendant, and refused, was, that “the measure of damages is a sum of money precisely commensurate with the wounded feelings of the plaintiff, Alvira B. West, by reason of the infliction of the blows.”

The plaintiff had a verdict of $400, and the defendant appealed.

Vories, for appellant.

1. The court below erred in rejecting a competent juror who was not challenged by the plaintiff. 2. The court erred in giving the fourth instruction. (2 Greenl. Ev. § 267, and note; 5 Mo. 523.)

Gardenhire and Morrow, for respondent, that the rule of damages was properly laid down, cited Littell's selected cases, 81; 1 Mass. Rep. 11; 3 Wend. Rep. 391; 7 Monroe, 395; 11 Pick. 379; 2 Gilman, 432; and insisted that the rejection of the juror was no ground of reversal, as it did not appear that the appellant was prejudiced.

RYLAND, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

This was an action of assault and battery, alleged to have been committed by the defendant, on the female plaintiff, Alvira B. West, wife of Francis A. West. The defendant denied having assaulted the said Alvira E. West, but stated that he was whipping a negro woman, whom he had hired of Francis A. West, and who had left his house and gone back to her master's house; that he went after her and found her, and ordered her to go back to his house; but instead of obeying him, she attempted to go up the steps to the room where her mistress, Alvira B. West, was; that he commenced whipping her with a cowhide; that Mrs. West came down the steps, and the negro woman ran and caught her around the waist, and with great force conveyed her back into the house; that if Mrs. West was struck, he did not know it, and did not intend it. At the trial, the court, after a certain man had been called up and sworn, and examined as to his qualifications as a juror, discharged him and made him stand aside. The defendant excepted to this act of the court, alleging that the man was a competent and fit person to be made a juror. He assigns this act of the court...