Hertzberg v. Pittsburgh Taxicab Co.

Citations

• 243 Pa. 540
• 90 A. 344
• 1914 Pa. LEXIS 659

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Damages—Suit by husband and wife for injuries to wife — Items of recovery — Expense of employing servant for wife— Evidence.</p> <p>1. In an action by husband and wife to recover damages resulting from an injury to the latter through being struck by defendant’s taxicab, in which a clear case of negligence was made out, the plaintiff set out in the statement of claim that the wife had been knocked down and severely wounded and bruised in her limbs, body and face, and that her nervous system had received a severe shock, and that she had been permanently injured. Held that, under this statement, the wife was properly permitted by the trial judge to answer a question in relation to the suffering and inconvenience caused by her injury, followed by proof that her condition was the direct result of the injury to her nervous system which was alleged in the statement of claim.</p> <p>2. In such an action, the expense of employing a servant for household work which the wife cannot perform because of her injury, is an item of loss for which the husband can recover.</p> <p>Negligence — Excessive damages — Seduction by Supreme Court —Act of May 20,1891, P. L. 101.</p> <p>3. The exceptional power conferred on the Supreme Court to grant a new trial because a verdict is excessive will not be exercised except in extreme cases, where the injustice of allowing an excessive verdict to stand is so manifest as to clearly show a failure of the court in which the case was tried to properly exercise its discretion.</p>