Young v. Mandis
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Woodbury District Court. — Joi-iN W. Anderson, Judge. ACTION at law, to recover $3,000 damages alleged to have been suffered by plaintiff, by being run over by the driver of defendant’s automobile.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Woodbury District Court. — Joi-iN W. Anderson, Judge. ACTION at law, to recover $3,000 damages alleged to have been suffered by plaintiff, by being run over by the driver of defendant’s automobile. Trial to a jury, which returned a verdict for plaintiff for $656.35, which the court thought was not in harmony with and in obedience to the instructions of the court, in that the verdict included items not submitted to the jury, and in excess of the amount authorized by the instructions. The court, upon its own motion, reduced the verdict to $156.35, and rendered judgment for the…
1Opinion of the CourtPreston, J.
1. Four items claimed for in the petition were: Lost time, three weeks, $75; damage to bicycle, $25; hospital bill, $31.35; physician’s bill, $25, — total, $156.35. Plaintiff’s testimony sustained the verdict of the jury as to these items, and this is the amount of the verdict as finally fixed by *1329the court. No evidence was introduced on behalf of the defendant, except that of the defendant himself, who testified as to his employment of the driver of the car and his duties, and so on.
The court instructed the jury:
“If, under the evidence and these instructions, you find for the plaintiff, and…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hensley v. Davidson Bros.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1907
- Jacobson v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1911
- Shultz v. GriffithSupreme Court of Iowa · 1897
- Woodworth v. Iowa Central Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1914
- Lowenstein v. Lombard Ayres & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Shuck v. KeefeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1928
- Kaltenheuser v. SeskerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1963
- Frint v. AmatoOregon Supreme Court · 1929