Lambie v. Vandenberg

30 N.W.2d 247, 251 Wis. 624, 1947 Wisc. LEXIS 446
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 19, 1947
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 30 N.W.2d 247 (Lambie v. Vandenberg) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lambie v. Vandenberg, 30 N.W.2d 247, 251 Wis. 624, 1947 Wisc. LEXIS 446 (Wis. 1947).

Opinions

Fritz, J.

The only question on this appeal is whether the amount of $2,500, assessed by the jury for Spindler’s pain and suffering, and included on that account in his recovery under the judgment, is so excessive that the jury’s assessment and the court’s order for his recovery thereof cannot be sustained, and therefore constitute reversible error. In addition the judgment provided also for Spindler’s recovery of $32 for loss of earnings, $190 for doctor and hospital bills and loss of clothing, and $2,500 for personal injury; but there is no appeal from the recovery in those respects.

Upon our review of the record it is our conclusion that under the evidence, including particularly the testimony of Dr. Mac-izaren and also Dr. Brown (who testified as expert witnesses called, respectively, by Spindler and the defendants), it was *626 within the province of the jury to believe and find that as the result of the manner in which Spindler was injured, by reason of causal negligence on the part of Vandenberg, Spindler has suffered such pain up to the date of the trial as to warrant the jury’s assessment of $2,500 as the amount of his damages for that item.

At the time of the accident Spindler was sitting on the right side of the rear seat of the car with which defendant’s car collided in a street intersection, while both were proceeding at about twenty-five miles per hour. The left front parts of the two cars came together, damaging both substantially. Spin-dler was thrown forward with such violence that the upper part of his body struck on, and his head snapped over the top of the front seat, and that he was then thrown back onto the rear seat and was in this position when the car came to rest. He did not strike his head, shoulder, neck, or any other part of his body ex^ cept his chest, but immediately after the accident he felt a sharp pain in his neck, which lasted five or ten minutes. Pie alighted, however, from the car and assisted his copassenger Lambie who was cut and bleeding, and he stayed around the scene of the accident twenty-five or thirty minutes assisting Lambie and looking at the cars. Then Spindler caught a ride home and went to bed and spent a comfortable night, and the next day he got up and went to work as usual and continued to do so for five or six days after the accident. Pie testified:

During four or five days after the accident his neck did not feel the way it should, and one morning while washing his face, he got a terrible sharp pain in the back of his neck. It seemed like a kind of cloudy feeling as though he was going to fall over. He did not go to the doctor until two days after that, but during those two days he had a “terrible pain” in his neck. Several days later he went to Dr. Kremers, and saw him about fifteen times all told. The doctor did not take any X rays, but gave Spindler medicine to rub on his neck. He used it, but it gave him no relief, and the neck became worse. It was a continuous *627 pain all the time. Later the doctor took one X ray which Dr. Kremers reported to Spindler was negative to fracture. Spindler continued Dr. Kremers’ medicine, but as it was giving him no relief, he went to Dr. MacLaren, and continued with him since. Dr. Brown, who examined him on May 20 and June 10, 1946, suggested to him that he wear a brace for a fracture of the vertebrae, and that this caused him to worry about' his condition, and the pain in his neck was getting worse; and he was nervous all the time and he could not sleep, but kept on with his regular work in the ordinary way and did not see another doctor or have any further treatments until July 16,1946, when he saw Dr. MacLaren. Dr. MacLaren took six X rays and prescribed the use of a brace, which Spindler has been wearing continuously every day since, taking it off only at night when at home resting. It holds his neck in a rigid position. There is pain even when he wears the brace, and when he takes it off the pain is severe. He has that pain continuously, but to support his family he had to keep on with his work, which consists only of walking around and reading meters, at which work he does not have to turn his neck. He is able to- turn his neck just a trifle, and to turn, he turns his body, and if he attempts to turn his neck it hurts more than usual. His condition is getting worse than it was three months ago; and since he got hurt, he has not been able to do any bowling or hunting, and cannot even play cards for any length of time, nor is he able to take care of the lawn, the furnace, and general repairs around the home.

Dr. MacLaren testified:

It was his conclusion from his examination of Spindler and the four X rays taken by him that he sustained a fracture of the neck involving the fourth and fifth cervical segments, with a fracture of the pedicles, which are the small portions of bone extending above and below each vertebral segment, which makes a joint with the segment above and below; that between the fourth and fifth segments there was a fracture of the facets, which are the little prongs that protrude out on the vertebra by which they articulate. The doctor would not' think it would be the natural result of the fractures and the injury he found that Spindler had sustained that his condition should become *628 progressively worse; and while there may be some healing in the boney tissues, Spindler is going to suffer from this injury for the rest of his life, and the pain the doctor described comes from the fact that Spindler’s nerves have been impinged upon, and it is not only by the fracture, but probably by the repair that it is now undergoing. He would say the pain would be a natural result of the condition he found. Toa reasonable certainty, in his opinion there was permanent injury, and while there would be some healing, there would be some suffering for the rest of Spindler’s life because the nerves were impinged upon, and the pain which he testified to would be a natural result of the condition Dr. MacLaren found. He saw Spindler on an average of every couple of weeks and no other treatment was suggested except the brace; and one would naturally expect that the immobilization of Spindler’s neck would result in healing, but it is slow, and it is reasonable that if he attempts to move his body by turning his neck, he would suffer a pain that radiates out much farther than the normal pain that he suffers by the use of the brace, and which he suffers more or less continuously.

Dr. Brown testified:

On May 20 and June 10, 1946, he examined Spindler, and after careful X-ray studies concluded that there was no fracture but that Spindler had a congenital abnormality of the cervical spine, and the condition he found in Spindler’s cervical region is of congenital origin, and there is no evidence in the films at all of trauma or injury to that portion of the spine or any fracture or fracture line or callus present or bone injury or pathology which iá demonstrable by the X ray, and that he thought Spindler suffered an injury to his neck; that he had some muscle spasm when the doctor saw him, but Dr. Brown f'elt it was of such a grade and nature that it would be reason-.

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

Related

Buschman v. Olson
30 N.W.2d 252 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1947)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
30 N.W.2d 247, 251 Wis. 624, 1947 Wisc. LEXIS 446, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lambie-v-vandenberg-wis-1947.