Whitson v. Whiteley Poultry Co., Docket No. 2754

Decision Date03 June 1968
Docket NumberNo. 2,Docket No. 2754,2
Citation162 N.W.2d 102,11 Mich.App. 598
PartiesMartha WHITSON and Harley Whitson, severally, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. WHITELEY POULTRY COMPANY, Inc., a foreign corporation, and Tilden Ray Jones, jointly and severally, Defendants-Appellees
CourtCourt of Appeal of Michigan — District of US

Franklin J. Shepherd, Ypsilanti, for appellants.

Garan, Lucow & Miller, Detroit, for appellees.

Before LESINSKI, C.J., and McGREGOR and CANHAM, * JJ.

CANHAM, Judge.

This dispute originated from a rear-end collision of the kind so common to our expressway system. Defendant, following too closely and trapped by the presence of a vehicle on his left, could not stop in time or swerve to avoid striking the vehicle in which Martha Whitson was riding. At the scene of this accident plaintiff complained of pain. She was taken to the hospital, was examined and released. Continuing treatment, she went to her own physician and others recommended by him and her attorney. Claim was made that Martha's back bothered her continuously from the accident to the time of trial. She states she is unable to remain in one position for any prolonged period of time. Harley Whitson states that he has to do some of the household chores because of his wife's difficulties. Approximately 1 1/2 years after the accident Martha Whitson entered the hospital for treatment of this injury.

Action was commenced in Washtenaw county circuit court, damages being stated as expenses and pains to wife and expenses and loss of consortium to husband. The case proceeded to a jury verdict, awarding a judgment to both plaintiffs. The judgment to plaintiff husband was in the exact amount of expenses he had paid to the time of trial ($55.85). The wife was awarded damages ($500) which if taken at the face amount of the bills is less than the amount of her medical expenses yet to be paid ($640.75). This verdict upon examination of the plaintiffs' exhibits would allow for pain and suffering in addition to the wife's expenses if an entry on plaintiffs' exhibits respecting insurance coverage of her hospital expense was considered. The carrier is not an intervening party in this suit. A motion for new trial was made by plaintiffs. The denial of this motion is the source of this appeal by right.

In attempting to show that the verdict was against the great weight of the evidence or contrary to law we are asked to review on the basis that no award was made for the husband's loss of consortium and that no award was made for the pain and suffering of the wife.

We first treat of the loss of consortium. Consortium is the conjugal fellowship of the parties. Montgomery v. Stephan (1960), 359 Mich. 33, 101 N.W.2d 227, holds an excellent work of scholarship by Mr. Justice Talbot Smith in which he explains that the concept encompasses society, companionship, service, affection, and all other incidents of the marriage relation. If damage was sustained to the relation the husband is certainly entitled to recompense. We do not, however, sit as a superjury. Those twelve summoned to judge the facts of the case have determined there was no loss sustained to the marriage relationship. They had evidence upon which to base their verdict in this respect. The jury saw the parties, and were aware that Martha Whitson conceived and bore another child since this accident.

Next we deal with the pain, suffering, and lack of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Edry v. Adelman
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • 22 July 2010
    ...acceptance among impartial and disinterested experts in the field. 10. Const. 1963, art. 1, § 14. 11. Whitson v. Whiteley Poultry Co., 11 Mich.App. 598, 162 N.W.2d 102 (1968). Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Duffin, 384 Mich. 812, 184 N.W.2d 739 (1971). ...
  • Cole for and on Behalf of Robison v. Detroit Auto. Inter-Insurance Exchange
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US
    • 9 November 1984
    ...and determining the credibility of witnesses is that of the jury. It is not the province of this Court. Whitson v. Whiteley Poultry Co., 11 Mich.App. 598, 601, 162 N.W.2d 102 (1968). The jury's finding that Nancy Robison would have returned to work September 29, 1980, is supported by the te......
  • Kucken v. Hygrade Food Products Corp., Docket No. 13813
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US
    • 1 March 1974
    ...all other incidents of the marriage relationship. Montgomery v. Stephan, 359 Mich 33, 101 N.W.2d 227 (1960); Whitson v. Whiteley Poultry Co., 11 Mich.App. 598, 162 N.W.2d 102 (1968). Like any other element of damages, loss of consortium must be proved by a preponderance of the evidence and ......
  • Cotton v. Minter
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Michigan
    • 11 April 1979
    ...Mich. 485, 488, 491, 116 N.W.2d 873 (1962); Montgomery v. Stephan, 359 Mich. 33, 101 N.W.2d 227 (1960); Whitson v. Whiteley Poultry Co., 11 Mich.App. 598, 601, 162 N.W.2d 102 (1968). There is another consideration which influences me to adopt the Plaintiffs' position. The purpose of no-faul......
  • 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