McHugh v. Schlosser

Citations

• 159 Pa. 480
• 28 A. 291
• 1894 Pa. LEXIS 873

Syllabus

<p>Innkeeper — Duty to guests — •Intoxication—Illness.</p> <p>If a guest in a hotel by reason of intoxication is troublesome and annoying to the other guests of the hquse, the proprietor of the hotel may right■iully put him out of the house, using no unnecessary force or violence. If, however, the trouble and disturbances caused by the guest are due to and, if he is removed, such removal must be in a manner suited to his condition. his sickness, he must be treated with the consideration due to a sick man,</p> <p>In an action to recover damages for the death of a guest alleged to have been caused by his wrongful removal from a hotel during his illness, the question to be considered is not whether the exposure of the deceased would have surely caused his death, but what were the consequences which it was reasonable to suppose might follow a sudden exposure of the deceased in the condition in which he then was.</p> <p>Negligence — Death—Damages—Evidence—Charge of court.</p> <p>In an action for death the true measure of damages is the pecuniary loss suffered, without any solatium for mental suffering or grief; and the pecuniary loss is what the deceased would probably have earned by his labor, physical or intellectual, in his business or profession, if the injury that caused death had not befallen him, and which would have gone to the support of his family. In fixing this amount, consideration should be given to the age of the deceased, his health, his ability and disposition to labor, his habits of living, and his expenditures.</p> <p>In such a case where there is no evidence to show the earning powers, or the habits of industry and thrift of the deceased, it is improper for the court to charge that the jury might estimate from the age, health and habits of the deceased, his earning capacity and the pecuniary loss of the plaintiff.</p>