Nofsinger v. Paup
Nofsinger v. Paup
Opinion of the Court
The plaintiff brought suit in the district court for Boone county, seeking to procure a judgment for damages because of an alleged assault at the hands of defendant, Alfred D. Paup. The jury returned a verdict against the plaintiff, and the defendant had judgment on the verdict. From this judgment the plaintiff appeals. The plaintiff alleges that on or about the 24th day of May, 1911, in the county of Boone, and state of Nebraska, the defendant unlawfully, wilfully and violently committed an assault upon him, and struck, bruised, beat and ill treated him, and maliciously and deliberately struck him in a brutal manner a violent blow upon the head with a dangerous and deadly weapon, to wit, a spade; that said blow was a violent blow upon the head with the blade of the said- spade, and inflicted a dangerous wound upon the plaintiff’s head, being about three inches in length, and of sufficient depth to penetrate to the bone, and the wound permanently disfigured and injured the plaintiff’s scalp and the bones of plaintiff’s head; that, as a result of said blow, bruises and wounds so made by the defendant upon the plaintiff, the plaintiff was made sick and disabled, so that a blood clot formed on the brain of plaintiff, and he was partially paralyzed and was disabled as a result of said injuries;
The defendant answered that the plaintiff, without any just cause or provocation, assaulted him, and would have greatly injured him if the defendant had not immediately defended himself; that in defending himself he unavoidably struck the plaintiff and somewhat injured him; that at the time of the striking by the defendant he had just cause to believe and did believe that he was in imminent danger of suffering great bodily harm from the plaintiff, and in defending himself used only such force as he deemed necessary to protect himself from the threatened injury, and if the plaintiff sustained any damage it was occasioned by his first assaulting the defendant. To this answer there was a reply, which is in substance a general denial.
The evidence tends to show that the defendant was the aggressor. He drove up behind the plaintiff and used the first objectionable language. He said: “What’s biting you? What’s biting you?” The plaintiff was driving a four-horse team along a very bad road, and was hauling a heavy load of wheat. The ground over which he was going was up-hill and very soft. He had a little 85-cent buggy whip in his hand. He had been using it for the purpose of keeping a slow horse abreast of the other horse. •As the defendant came up he shortened the distance between them until they were only separated by about four feet. The defendant then had the spade in his hands. ;He had hold of the handle. According to plaintiff’s testi
Because the evidence is insufficient to sustain the verdict, the judgment of the court below is
Reversed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- John L. Nofsinger v. Alfred D. Paup
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published