Howell v. Scoggins
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the' District Court, Tenth Judicial District, County of Colusa. The evidence on the trial was confined to the circumstances constituting the assault and battery. No evidence was offered tending to show that the. plaintiff had paid or become liable to pay any money for medical attendance, nursing, board, or for the prosecution of the action. The plaintiff recovered judgment for eight hundred dollars and costs, and the defendant appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the' District Court, Tenth Judicial District, County of Colusa. The evidence on the trial was confined to the circumstances constituting the assault and battery. No evidence was offered tending to show that the. plaintiff had paid or become liable to pay any money for medical attendance, nursing, board, or for the prosecution of the action. The plaintiff recovered judgment for eight hundred dollars and costs, and the defendant appealed. The other facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, McKinstry, J.:
This was an action for an assault and battery. The Court instructed the jury: “In actions of aggravated as-
sault and battery, the jury are not limited in assessing damages to mere compensation, but may give exemplary damages, and may take into consideration the plaintiff’s expenses in the prosecution of the suit.” In a note at the 'foot of this charge, Hilliard on Remedies for Torts, and Sedgwick on damages are cited as authority for it.
Hilliard, at the page referred to (442), only says that it “has sometimes been held” that the jury may take the plaintiff’s…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Day v. WoodworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1852
- Fairbanks v. WitterWisconsin Supreme Court · 1864
- Hicks v. FosterNew York Supreme Court · 1853
- Beecher v. Derby Bridge & Ferry Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1855
3Cited by8 opinions
- Viner v. UntrechtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
- Yuen Suey v. FleshmanOregon Supreme Court · 1913
- Hall v. Memphis & Charleston R.District Court, W.D. Tennessee · 1882
- Spooner v. CadyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Falk v. WatermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.