From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lindsey v. Kindt

Supreme Court of Alabama
Apr 17, 1930
128 So. 143 (Ala. 1930)

Opinion

6 Div. 585.

April 17, 1930.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; Joe C. Hail, Judge.

Lange, Simpson Brantley, Ormond Somerville, Jr., and Jas. A. Simpson, all of Birmingham, for appellant.

The amount of the verdict is so grossly excessive as to involve the conviction that it is the result of prejudice, and a new trial should have been ordered. Twinn Tree Lbr. Co. v. Day, 181 Ala. 565, 61 So. 914; Southern R. Co. v. Grady, 192 Ala. 515, 68 So. 346; C. of Ga. v. White, 175 Ala. 60, 56 So. 574.

Nesbit Sadler, of Birmingham, for appellee.

The judgment as reduced, in view of all the circumstances and the several elements of damage to be considered, is not at all unreasonable, and should not be disturbed by the court.


This case was tried at the same time and before the same jury as that of S.E. Lindsey, Appellant, v. Grace Kindt, Appellee, disposed of April 3, 1930. Lindsey v. Kindt (Ala. Sup.) 128 So. 139. The opinion in that case disposes of all questions presented on this appeal, except the question of the amount of the recovery.

Post, p. 190.

The verdict of the jury awarded the plaintiff $3,500, and, on the hearing of the motion for new trial, a remittitur was entered by the plaintiff, reducing the amount of the recovery to $1,000, and thereupon the motion was overruled.

The plaintiff, in addition to damages for personal injuries to himself, if proximately caused by the defendant's negligence, plaintiff's negligence not contributing thereto, or defendant's wantonness, was entitled to recover damages resulting for injuries inflicted on his wife, the loss of her services and society, and expenses incident to the treatment of her injuries. Alabama City, G. A. Ry. Co. v. Appleton, 171 Ala. 324, 54 So. 638, Ann. Cas. 1913A, 1181; Tomme v. Pullman Co. et al., 207 Ala. 511, 93 So. 462. And under the circumstances it was within the province of the jury to award punitive damages. Lindsey v. Grace Kindt, post, p. 190, 128 So. 139.

We are not able to affirm that the modified judgment is unjust, and that a new trial should be awarded.

Affirmed.

ANDERSON, C. J., and SAYRE and THOMAS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Lindsey v. Kindt

Supreme Court of Alabama
Apr 17, 1930
128 So. 143 (Ala. 1930)
Case details for

Lindsey v. Kindt

Case Details

Full title:LINDSEY v. KINDT

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Apr 17, 1930

Citations

128 So. 143 (Ala. 1930)
128 So. 143

Citing Cases

Worrell v. Hodrick

244 Ala. 308, 13 So.2d 182; Green v. Jefferson County Bldg. Loan, 241 Ala. 549, 3 So.2d 415; Cairnes v.…

Moore v. Parks

cit. 716 [1] "* * * In an action by a husband in his individual capacity to recover damages for injury to his…