Downer v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.
Opinion of the Court
Two .questions are presented by the appellant upon this appeal. The first arises from an exception to the admission of evidence of a, physician as to the injuries sustained by the plaintiff as the result of the accident. The plaintiff was injured when, attempting to alight from one of the street railroad cars of the defendant, the complaint alleging that the plaintiff was severely injured and bruised about different parts of her body, and particularly as follows: “ A fracture of the right fibula (smaller bone of the leg) at its lower third; a badly sprained ankle, with ecchymosis (discoloration) extending-from the toes to within two inches of the knee, and great swelling; of the foot and ankle.”
The plaintiff called as a witness Dr. McDougall, who was her attending physician. He testified without objection that the condition of the defendant at the time of the trial was “ deformity of the right ankle with a great deal of thickening of the lower end of the tibia, the larger bone of the leg, especially in the frontal aspect; ” that,he found ankylosis, “ that is, the immobility of the ankle joint,” inability to move the foot backward and forward; that that this condition was permanent. This testimony was taken with
The other objection taken by' the defendant is that the verdict is excessive. The plaintiff was employed as a carpet sewer, her pay averaging about $8 per week. She earned nothing from the time of the accident, March 2, 1898, until October second of the same year. She paid $35 for medicines and other expenses incident to the accident, excluding the doctor’s bill, which amounted to $150, and there was evidence tending to show that the in jury to her ankle was permanent. The jury found a vérdict for the plaintiff for $7,000, and this, we think, under the circumstances, was excessive. A consideration of the testimony has satisfied us that the verdict should not be allowed to stand for more than $5,000, and the judgment must be reversed and a new trial ordered, unless the plaintiff stipulates to reduce the verdict to that amount. If such simulation
Van Brunt, P. J., Rumsey, McLaughlin and Hatch, JJ., concurred.
Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, unless plaintiff stipulate to reduce judgment to $5,142.90 ; in which case judgment as so modified affirmed, without costs.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.