From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hipsh v. Hollander

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Jul 19, 1932
161 A. 524 (Conn. 1932)

Opinion

Argued May 12th, 1932

Decided July 19th, 1932.

ACTION to recover damages for personal injuries, alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendant, brought to the Superior Court in New Haven County and tried to the jury before John Richards Booth, J.; verdict and judgment for the plaintiff and appeal by the defendant. No error.

Richardson Bronson, for the appellant (defendant).

Michael V. Blansfield and Sidney S. Cassel, with whom, on the brief, was Herman B. Engelman, for the appellee (plaintiff), at the direction of the court did not argue the cause.


Such corrections of the finding as could be granted as to the offers of proof pertaining to the speed of the defendant's truck before it struck the plaintiff, the distance it ran thereafter, and the length of time the plaintiff stood in the street before being struck, would not essentially affect the assignments relating to the charge. The subject-matter of the request to charge was sufficiently embodied in the instructions given. Consideration of the context demonstrates that the single excerpt from the charge which is complained of could not have been understood by the jury as imposing upon the defendant, instead of the plaintiff, the burden of proof of negligence of the defendant, freedom from contributory negligence, and proximate cause.

The principal controversy of fact was whether, as he claimed, the plaintiff proceeded across the street in plain sight of approaching traffic and stood in the center several seconds before being hit or, as the defendant contended, he ran suddenly from behind parked cars into the path of the defendant's automobile. Evidence amply warranted the jury in adopting the plaintiff's version, as they obviously did, and all the other issues essential to a recovery clearly were resolvable in his favor. The verdict, accordingly, must stand.

The amount of damages allowed ($6000), while possibly generous, is not so disproportionate to fair compensation for the proper elements of damage — the plaintiff's injuries, which included a compound fracture of the thigh, necessitating an open operation and three months in the hospital, suffering incident thereto, permanent shortening of the leg and impairment of flexion, and special damages for surgical, medical, and hospital expenses of about $1200 — that we can hold the trial court in error in sustaining the award.


Summaries of

Hipsh v. Hollander

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Jul 19, 1932
161 A. 524 (Conn. 1932)
Case details for

Hipsh v. Hollander

Case Details

Full title:FREDERICK HIPSH vs. H. A. HOLLANDER

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut

Date published: Jul 19, 1932

Citations

161 A. 524 (Conn. 1932)
161 A. 524