National Homeopathic Hospital v. Hord

D.C. Circuit

National Homeopathic Hospital v. Hord

204 F.2d 397, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 204, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 2443

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedApril 9, 1953

Docket11402_1

StatusPublished

Cited by24 cases

This text of 204 F.2d 397 (National Homeopathic Hospital v. Hord) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

National Homeopathic Hospital v. Hord, 204 F.2d 397, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 204, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 2443 (D.C. Cir. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff in an action for damages for the death of a child three days old. The facts are stated in an opinion rendered by Judge Holtzoff, denying defendant’s motion for a new trial. Hord v. National Homeopathic Hospital, D.C.1952, 102 F. *398 Supp. 792. The contention principally urged by the defendant-appellant is that the jury should have been instructed to confine its verdict, in the event it found for the plaintiff, to the out-of-pocket expenses actually incurred by the parents. We cannot accept this contention. For the reasons set forth in the opinion of the District Court, damages in a case such as the present may be substantial in amount. ’Of course, “if in a particular case the verdict is deemed excessive the trial justice or the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, on appeal of the cause, may order a reduction of the verdict”. Section 16-1201, D.C.Code 1951 (relative to suits for wrongful death). But appellant has not asked us to take action of that sort. And the amount of the verdict here ($17,-000) is not so extreme as to cause us to act of our own motion.

The remaining contentions of the appellant relate chiefly to rulings on points of evidence. None of them appear to us to require discussion here. The evidence of negligence was ample, and the case was properly submitted to the jury.

There being no error, the judgment of the District Court will be

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff in an action for damages for the death of a child three days old. The facts are stated in an opinion rendered by Judge Holtzoff, denying defendant’s motion for a new trial. Hord v. National Homeopathic Hospital, D.C.1952, 102 F. *398 Supp. 792. The contention principally urged by the defendant-appellant is that the jury should have been instructed to confine its verdict, in the event it found for the plaintiff, to the out-of-pocket expenses actually incurred by the parents. We cannot accept this contention. For the reasons set forth in the opinion of the District Court, damages in a case such as the present may be substantial in amount. ’Of course, “if in a particular case the verdict is deemed excessive the trial justice or the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, on appeal of the cause, may order a reduction of the verdict”. Section 16-1201, D.C.Code 1951 (relative to suits for wrongful death). But appellant has not asked us to take action of that sort. And the amount of the verdict here ($17,-000) is not so extreme as to cause us to act of our own motion.

The remaining contentions of the appellant relate chiefly to rulings on points of evidence. None of them appear to us to require discussion here. The evidence of negligence was ample, and the case was properly submitted to the jury.

There being no error, the judgment of the District Court will be

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 F.2d 397, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 204, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 2443, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-homeopathic-hospital-v-hord-cadc-1953.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack