Goodenough v. McGrew
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from the Harrison Circuit Court. This is an action for damages for injury to the person, property and means of support of plaintiff, because of the alleged sale of intoxicating liquors by defendant to Milton II. Good-enough, the plaintiff’s husband. The answer was a general denial. There was trial by jury, verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $154, actual damages, and $900, exemplary damages, and defendant appeals,
1Opinion of the CourtRotiieock, J.
i. intoxicaexemplary™1 damages. I. The court, among other instructions to the jury, gave the following: “16. The fact that the plaintiff’s husband was in the habit of becoming intoxicated, before the defendant sold him the intoxicating liquors complained of, is no defense to this action, hut should go in aggravation of exemplary damages.1” This instruction was erroneous. The bill of exceptions shows that there was no evidence that the defendant was acquainted with the husband’s prior habits or occupation, at the *671time he furnished him liquor as stated in plaintiff’s petition. Whilst it is true…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Pegram v. StortzWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1888
- Amos v. Prom, Inc.District Court, N.D. Iowa · 1953
- Jockers v. BorgmanSupreme Court of Kansas · 1883
- Boom v. BoomSupreme Court of Iowa · 1928
- Reizenstein v. ClarkSupreme Court of Iowa · 1897
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.