Schwartz v. Columbus Citizens Telephone Co.

Citations

• 16 Ohio N.P. (n.s.) 129

Syllabus

<p>Custom, — As to Inspection of Conditions Under Which Work is to be Done — Not Admissible in Evidence, When — Excessive Damages— Duty of the Court Where the Evidence and Charge are Disregarded in Fixing the Amount — Damages Distinguished from Injuries— Compensation Not Restitution.</p> <p>1. Where a telephone company has been deprived of the defenses of assumed risk and contributory negligence through its failure to pay into the state insurance fund, and one of its lineman brings an action for injuries caused by the fall of a pole that he had climbed in the course of his employment and which was rotten at the ground, evidence will be excluded as to a custom which cast upon the lineman rather than upon the company the duty of inspecting poles with respect to their condition; and in such a case the jury will be instructed that the company is specifically charged with the legal responsibility resulting from its alleged knowledge as to the defective condition of the pole.</p> <p>2. Failure of the jury to follow the evidence and the instructions of the court touching the damage suffered by plaintiff is ground upon which a trial judge may set the verdict aside; and where a verdict has been returned ,of $5,000 for injuries to a telephone lineman from a fall, resulting in nervous shock and his being in a hospital for one week and remaining idle (though perhaps through mistaken advice] for a year and a half, a new trial should be granted unless the plaintiff consents to accept a remittitur of $2,500.</p>