Heitman v. Klubertanz

PEE CUEIAM. The action is one to recover damages for personal injury to plaintiff caused by his being struck by defendant’s automobile. There was a verdict in plaintiff’s favor for $3,500, upon which judgment was entered, and defendant appeals from the judgment. The only *487 question argued and presented for review is whether the verdict is so excessive as to require a new trial or a reduction. At the time he was injured plaintiff was 79 years old. He was blind in one eye, otherwise in fairly good health. For some time, except during a short illness, he had been doing chores on a farm, for which he received his board and lodging. His life expectancy was some four years and nine months. ’ The injury consisted of a fracture of the thigh bone of one leg near the hip. He was confined to a hospital for 12 weeks. There was necessarily considerable pain. He was delirious part of the time during the first several weeks. There resulted a shortening of the leg about three-fourths of an inch. Up to the time of the trial, over five months after the accident, he was unable to walk without a crutch. The opinion of the doctor was that further improvement would be very slow, that after some time plaintiff might be able to use a cane in place of the crutch. Plaintiff’s hospital and medical expense was $374.80. An examination of such cases as Johnson v. St. Paul City Ry. Co. 67 Minn. 260 , 69 N. W. 900 , 36 L. R. A. 586; Denchfield v. M. St. P. & S. S. M. Ry. Co. 114 Minn. 58 , 130 N. W. 551 ; and Walker v. Duluth St. Ry. Co. 114 Minn. 238 , 130 N. W. 1026 , tends to sustain the amount of the present verdict. The Walker case especially is very much in point. The verdict is not so excessive as to call for either a new trial or a reduction. Judgment affirmed.