Rappa v. Connecticut Co.

1 Citing case

  1. Bushnell v. Bushnell

    103 Conn. 583 (Conn. 1925)   Cited 174 times
    Upholding jury charge that "[m]ental suffering . . . is also as proper an element of damage as physical suffering when it is a natural and proximate consequence of the physical injury"

    We have ourselves given partial recognition to this principle in holding that the care required of a child is to be measured in the light of that which is to be expected of one of his immature years. Rappa v. Connecticut Co., 96 Conn. 285, 114 A. 81. Certainly in all reason he who stricken by paralysis or seized by an epileptic fit, still continues with his hands upon the wheel of the automobile he was driving, and, unconscious, so directs it as to cause its collision with another, cannot be held negligent for the way in which he controlled it; and no more can he who exercises a like direction after he has been overtaken by sleep. In such a case, the question must be, was the defendant negligent in permitting himself to fall asleep.