Van Liew v. Atwood

Citations

• 115 Wash. 580
• 197 P. 921
• 1921 Wash. LEXIS 778

Syllabus

<p>Damages (99)—Pleading—Impairment of Earning Capacity. In an action by husband and wife for personal injuries to the wife, in which there was evidence that the wife had been incapacitated for the performance of domestic duties, hut no claim therefor was made in the complaint, nor any proof of the pecuniary loss suffered by reason of inability to perform such services, it was error for the court to instruct the jury to take into consideration to what extent the wife’s capacity to perform domestic services had been impaired as a result of the injury.</p> <p>Trial (92)—Instructions—Abstract Instructions. An instruction to the jury upon a matter not in issue under the pleadings, but upon which there was evidence, cannot be regarded as harmless error on the theory of being in the nature of an abstract instruction.</p> <p>Trial (117)—Instructions—Cured by Withdrawal or Other Instructions. In an action for personal injuries to a wife, in which there was no evidence of the pecuniary value of the loss of the wife’s domestic services, an erroneous instruction by the court to allow for such loss was not rendered harmless by the court’s remission of $1,000 from the jury’s verdict for “permanent injuries” and allowing the verdict on “sustained injuries” in $3,000 to stand, where it was impossible to determine under which head the jury placed the loss of domestic services.</p>