Opinion
Record No. 2371.
June 9, 1941.
Present, Campbell, C. J., and Holt, Hudgins, Gregory, Browning and Spratley, JJ.
1. INSANITY — Actions against Lunatics and Their Committees — Estate of Insane Citizens Not Liable for State Hospitalization Charges under Code Section 1058 — Case at Bar. — The instant case was an action by notice of motion for judgment in favor of the Commonwealth against the estate of an insane World War veteran to recover for hospitalization. The veteran was committed to the Western State Hospital and transferred at the instance of the Veterans' Administration and recommitted to what was called the Davis Clinic, located at the Southwestern State Hospital at Marion. This clinic was erected with money appropriated by the General Assembly to the Southwestern State Hospital and was created under arrangement between the Southwestern State Hospital authorities and the United States Veterans' Administration. Section 1058 of the Code of 1936 provides that the estate of any person committed to any hospital for the insane shall not be charged with the expenses incident thereto, or for maintenance therein.
Held: That the veteran was a citizen of Virginia and was an inmate of one of the State institutions for the insane where there could be no legal hospitalization charges against him or his estate, since section 1058 of the Code of 1936 was applicable.
2. INSANITY — Code Section 1058 — Policy of State Is to Care for Insane. — The policy of the State, as reflected by section 1058 of the Code of 1936, is to take care of insane persons without expense to them.
3. INSANITY — Actions against Lunatics and Their Committees — Contact as to Liability for Hospitalization — Verdict of Jury Settles Dispute — Case at Bar. — The instant case was an action by notice of motion for judgment in favor of the Commonwealth against the estate of an insane World War veteran to recover for hospitalization, the estate being represented by a committee. Section 1058 of the Code of 1936 provides that the estate of any person committed to any hospital for the insane shall not be charged with the expenses incident thereto, or for maintenance therein, but the Commonwealth contended that the person acting as the committee for the insane person made a contract for the hospitalization of his ward.
Held: That the verdict of the jury settled the contention adversely to the Commonwealth.
4. INSANITY — Actions against Lunatics and Their Committees — Quasi-Contractual Liability for Necessaries Is Subject to Code Section 1058 — Case at Bar. — The instant case was an action by notice of motion for judgment in favor of the Commonwealth against the estate of an insane World War veteran to recover for hospitalization. Section 1058 of the Code of 1936 provides that the estate of any person committed to any hospital for the insane shall not be charged with the expenses incident thereto, or for maintenance therein, but it was urged by the Commonwealth that an insane person was liable for necessaries furnished him in good faith and that this obligation was quasi-contractual in its nature and was implied by law.
Held: That while the contention of the Commonwealth was true, the principle was subject to section 1058 of the Code of 1936 which controlled in the instant case.
5. INSTRUCTIONS — Request — Litigant Must Prepare and Offer Instructions. — It is the duty of a litigant, who thinks the instructions given do not fairly present the case from the standpoint of the evidence which is favorable to him, to prepare and offer such instructions as will accomplish this purpose. If he does not do it, censure for the omission lies at his door.
6. INSTRUCTIONS — Appeal and Error — Harmless Error Where No Other Verdict Could Have Been Rendered. — If instructions are erroneous they constitute harmless error where no other verdict could have been reached under the law and evidence.
Error to a judgment of the Circuit Court of the city of Richmond. Hon. Julien Gunn, judge presiding.
Affirmed.
The opinion states the case.
Abram P. Staples, Attorney-General, and Walter E. Rogers, Special Assistant, for the plaintiff in error.
Hunton, Williams, Anderson, Gay Moore and A. G. Robertson, for the defendant in error.
This is an action at law by notice of motion for a judgment. in favor of the Commonwealth of Virginia against the estate of Frank Switzer, a World War veteran, who was and is insane, the estate being represented by Carson G. Mason, Committee. The veteran was committed to the Western State Hospital, in Staunton, in 1928. He remained in that institution until 1932, when at the instance of the Veterans Administration he was transferred and recommitted to what was called the Davis Clinic, which was located at the Southwestern State Hospital at Marion, Virginia. (It is not now in existence as the "Davis Clinic.")
The Veterans Administration paid for his hospitalization at $2.00 per day, or $60.00 per month at the Davis Clinic until April, 1935. This organization declined to make further payments because the government was just finishing a veterans facility hospital at Roanoke, Virginia, in which he was eligible to be received for care and attention. His committee consented to his transfer to the Davis Clinic, and when the change to the Roanoke facility was suggested, the committee would not agree to it because he thought that his ward would receive individual care at a small institution which might not be accorded him at a larger one. This committee was discharged on January 27, 1936, and was succeeded by Major Mason, the defendant in error in this case.
The amount claimed to be due the Commonwealth was the sum of $2.00 per day from April 23, 1935, to April 23, 1937.
Section 1058 of the Code of Virginia is the statute which contains provisions for the expenses of insane persons. So much of it as is applicable is as follows:
"Sec. 1058. When, to whom and by whom, expenses of insane * * * persons are paid. — The estate of any person committed to any hospital for the insane * * * shall not be charged with any expense incident thereto or for his maintenance therein. Nothing in this section, however, shall be construed to relieve the committee of any insane * * * person * * * from paying to the steward of any hospital * * * the sum required to be paid by this chapter for extra comforts of persons confined in said hospital * * *; nor to make it unlawful for any such committee to make voluntary gifts which said committee may deem conducive to the happiness and comfort of such persons so confined. * * *"
A fair deduction from the evidence, we think, is that the Davis Clinic was really a part of the Southwestern State Hospital at Marion. It was created in 1921, without statutory authorization, but under an arrangement between the Southwestern State Hospital authorities and the United States Veterans Administration.
[1, 2] The testimony of Mr. Bradford, who is connected with the office of the Director of the Budget, shows that the General Assembly of Virginia appropriated money specifically to the Southwestern State Hospital and the Davis Clinic buildings were erected with the money from such appropriations. It is true that it was operated largely by money derived from pay patients of the Veterans Administration. When the Davis Clinic went out of existence in 1937, the buildings became a part of the Southwestern State Hospital, a state institution. In our opinion it is of no special significance that the expenses of the veteran were paid by the Veterans Administration until it secured its own facility at Roanoke. This veteran is a citizen of Virginia and was an inmate of one of the state's institutions for the insane where there could be no legal hospitalization charge against him or his estate. He was transferred to another like institution, as Dr. DeJarnette testified, "under compulsion." We think that the statute quoted is applicable and that there cannot be any legal charge against his estate. The policy of the state, as reflected by the statute, is to take care of its unfortunates, of the type here, without expense to them.
[3, 4] It is urged by the state that the first person acting as committee made a contract with the Davis Clinic for the hospitalization of his ward, but the verdict of the jury settled that contention adversely to it. It is further urged by the state that an insane person is liable for necessaries furnished him in good faith and that this obligation is quasi-contractual in its nature and it is implied by law. This is true; but it is subject, of course, to the statutory provision which is controlling in this case.
The instructions, which are not model ones, are based upon the facts proven. The record does not disclose that any other instructions were tendered to the court and refused by it. It is the duty of a litigant, who thinks the instructions given do not fairly present the case from the standpoint of the evidence which is favorable to him, to prepare and offer such instructions as will accomplish this purpose. If he does not do it, censure for the omission lies at his door.
If the instructions complained of are erroneous it is harmless error, because we do not think that any other verdict could have been reached under the law and the evidence.
The judgment is plainly right and we affirm it.
Affirmed.