OCR Text |
Show nlehed with a houM In which to live, and waa also furnlehed with fuel. He suffered fracture of the wrist, the Joint being practically anlld, tha musclee that eaiend tha fingers being contracted. At tha tlma of tha trial ha could not cloaa hla hand, which waa Inollnad to tip back. VERDICT HELD EXCESSIVE. "Tha question now arises whether tha verdict la ao groesly exceaalve that It ahocka tha ordinary man'a senee of Justice, la tha vardlet ao excesalva that It muat neeeaesrlly ha regarded aa the reault of paaalon and prejudice? The trial court did not think ao. Cnncedlnc that tha verdict la exceaalve, ex-ceaalve, more than aome other Injury might have found, more than we would have allowed plaintiff had we been Jurnra, atlll auch esceselveneee In and of Itaelf and that la all that can ha aald of tha verdict la not enough to require a reversal of thla Judgment. "While we do not regard the verdict ver-dict aa the reault of paaalon and prejudice, we are convinced that It la excessive and therefore unjuat to the defendant. (Ireat latitude la neceaaarlly allowed to a Jury In assessing damages for personal In-Jurlea. In-Jurlea. A plaintiff who la entitled to damagea ahuuld be fully cnmpenaated. No verdict la right which falls lo eompenaate none la right which more than compenaatea. The trta) Judge ahould not In thla caee have granted a new trial, but. In tha exercise of hla dlacretlon, he ahould have required plaintiff to remit part of tha Judgment, Judg-ment, and In 'the event of refuaal ahould have granted the motion for a new trial." SUPREME COURT ORDERS RETURN 10F JURY AWARD estate Tribunal Hold $10,. IT 000 Damage Excessive t for Section Foreman Who Suffers Injury to Wriit Charlea Bhepard, aectlon foreman. Ja, April 11, li, waa an employe of ?o Barton Payne, tha latter being admlnlatralor of rallroada. While Jidlng with hla crew on a handcar the- car left the track and Hhepard ag thrown off, due to tha derailment, derail-ment, and waa Injured. He claimed ". alleging negligence on the Tart of tha railroad In that the car waa equipped with a gauge too wide to properly fit tha track. Tha defendant denied negligence ' And affirmatively pleaded aaaumptlon w rlak and contributory negligence. .Trial waa had In tha Third dlalrlct aieurt. Judge W. H. Hramel prealdlng. tna trial being heard by a Jury, which Returned a verdict In favor of Khepard for 11 a. 000. tha amount demanded hv Khepard In hla complaint. Judgment waa Accordingly entered. I JUD0MINT REDUCED. Appeal waa taken by tha railroad To tha atate auprema court, and In an .opinion written by Justice A. J. Weber It la declared that the Jury ahould not have awarded damagee In exreee of 17(00. "Tha plaintiff." aaya tha opinion, "la therefore required to .remit tha aum of 13(00 from the Judgment within twenty daya after thla opinion la filed and aerved on Ills counsel, and to file euch remittitur . Aamnum with tha clerk of thla court ' within auch tlma, or In oaae ha refuse re-fuse lo do ao a new trial will he pranteel to defendant unconditionally, and rn tha latter even plaintiff to be required to pay tha coata on appeal, tf, -aowever, tha remittitur la made, Jhevr-the order ahould be that neither -frtirTjr recover auch eoata. "JU I Insisted," aaya lha court, "that tha. verdict la not tha reault of a deliberate consideration of tha evidence evi-dence by tha Jury, and that It la baaed I upon paaalon and prejudice. At the Mans ha waa Injured, plaintiff waa (0 years, old and waa then earning 1106 per month and In addition was fur- |