Koelsch v. Olshesky

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Koelsch v. Olshesky

40 A.2d 186, 131 Conn. 404, 1944 Conn. LEXIS 293

DecidedNovember 30, 1944

StatusPublished

This text of 40 A.2d 186 (Koelsch v. Olshesky) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Koelsch v. Olshesky, 40 A.2d 186, 131 Conn. 404, 1944 Conn. LEXIS 293 (Colo. 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff, a five-year-old boy, was struck and injured by a car driven by the defendant *405 and had a verdict for $1000. The defendant appeals from the denial of his motion to set the verdict aside on the sole ground that it was excessive.

The jury could reasonably have found the following facts: The plaintiff sustained a severe bump on the head resulting in a small scar and an injury to his knee causing a hematoma and lameness. He was treated by physicians for two months and cared for by his mother and aunt, the latter being a registered nurse. He suffered pain and disability, was troubled with vomiting for two weeks, did not sleep well and wet his bed, and his eyes watered. These symptoms had disappeared at the time of trial nearly two years after the accident but he still complained of headaches and exhibited personality changes. The medical bills amounted to $65.

The memorandum of the trial court shows that the defendant’s claims with reference to the amount of the verdict were carefully considered, yet the motion to set it aside was denied. This ruling is entitled to great weight. Corey v. Phillips, 126 Conn. 246, 256, 10 Atl. (2d) 370. As was said in that case, “While a study of the record suggests that the jury were liberal in their assessment of damages, we cannot say that their verdicts were unwarranted by the evidence.”

There is no error.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff, a five-year-old boy, was struck and injured by a car driven by the defendant *405 and had a verdict for $1000. The defendant appeals from the denial of his motion to set the verdict aside on the sole ground that it was excessive.

The jury could reasonably have found the following facts: The plaintiff sustained a severe bump on the head resulting in a small scar and an injury to his knee causing a hematoma and lameness. He was treated by physicians for two months and cared for by his mother and aunt, the latter being a registered nurse. He suffered pain and disability, was troubled with vomiting for two weeks, did not sleep well and wet his bed, and his eyes watered. These symptoms had disappeared at the time of trial nearly two years after the accident but he still complained of headaches and exhibited personality changes. The medical bills amounted to $65.

The memorandum of the trial court shows that the defendant’s claims with reference to the amount of the verdict were carefully considered, yet the motion to set it aside was denied. This ruling is entitled to great weight. Corey v. Phillips, 126 Conn. 246, 256, 10 Atl. (2d) 370. As was said in that case, “While a study of the record suggests that the jury were liberal in their assessment of damages, we cannot say that their verdicts were unwarranted by the evidence.”

There is no error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A.2d 186, 131 Conn. 404, 1944 Conn. LEXIS 293, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/koelsch-v-olshesky-conn-1944.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack