Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1892-12-31
LAW COURT DECISIONS.
Sanford Adams vs.. n. C. r. r, Co, Also State
vs.. David Butter ct ais.

The following law court decisions Ia hcn,
nebec county ease have beeu received by
tlerk of Courts Choate
SANFORD ADAMS vs.. NJ. {. K. Il, Go.
RKscRirr Action on the ease for per.
,onal injuries, tried al the oct. term, 1891
of the :. J. Court.
On Nov. 20, 1855 between 5 and . o'clock
\. NJ, about one mile north of the VIM
throp station, the defendants freight train,
on which the plaintiff was fireman, ran into
a washout on the shore of Lake MaraBo-
cook, whereby the plaintiff received u cut
through the scalp, seven inches IN length,
his body legs and arms were burned to u
blister so that the skin came of, aud his
face, hips and legs were confused. His
scalp wound was closed by seven stitches,
he was obliged TO lie upon the bhstercd
wounds, and he was confined to his bed for
two weeks.
ON Dee. % following, lac began to do
some light work about the round-houst and
soon afterwards began firing again as II
spare hand. Subsequently he fired for ice
trains and circus trains. some of the time
nights and Sundays, and continued to work
firing more or less, Che says two-thirds of
defendants employment. His name. how
ever, was kept upon the payroll from the
time he was injured in Nov, 1888, until he
left the employment in Dee, 1890. Dur.
ing which time he received payment for
jIy DAYS work, at wages running from
81 40 to ~. 10 per day, making in all dur
ing that period 81 ,ll2.S2.
In April, 1891, he applied to the defend
h.. h..
informed that the employee who had served
through the winter months could not be
Justly turned out to make room for him.
In July following (lS9l) he commenced
tlli, action, and at the trial contended that
when the accident occurred he received a
shock 10 his nervous system, from which he
has never recovered; but while this trouble
lay partially dormant for about two years,
(though he was suffering more or less all
the time since he left the road he has been
constantly growing worse. He also con-
tended tha, his injuries was of permanent
character.
The verdict was for ST, $1,000.
The defendant, without denying its liabil-
ity, contend that although severely injured,
the plaintiff exaggerates his damages.
However much the jury gave the plain
tiff for being burned. thrown into the ice
cold water of the lake, from which lac WAS
finally extricatcd alive, for his pains of
body and mind, can never be known; but
obviously sou,c portion of the verdict was
appropriated To compensation for future or
prospective damages. "The limit in respect
of prospective damages is that they must
he such as il is reasonably certain will irre-
sistabiy and necessarily result from the in
jury" Files '. n. Y. Cent. Il. X. Co., ~
y. Y. ~.
The medical testimony, as well as that of
other witnesses, is quite conflicting. The
former testifying for the plaintiff, declare
theis opinion to be that the plaintiff received
a shock and that marked symptoms of
paralysis have already developed. On tn,
other hand others testify that the alleged
symptoms, all of which are subjective,
would have developed sooner than two
years if they had existed and were caused
by the injury, and express the opinion that
he will recover
The plaintiffs non expert witnesses, testi-
fy unqualifiedly to the great change for
the worse, which they have noted in the
plaintiffs appearance and actions. While
those called by the defendant, especially his
co-einployces on the road. are equally posi-.
tive that no change. either in appearance or
action, has been observed by them.
After a careful examination of these 30
printed pages of evidence, we fail to see
that. for what the plaintiff has already ex-
experienced and will probably suffer in the
future. the verdict is SO excessive as to
warrant another expensive trial by another
jury. His labor averaged Is or more.
lie was in line of promotion, only 2s years
of age. lie has been literally treated By
the defendant, for he was paid during his
confinement to the house, and the next sue.
ceetling two wears. the same as q well FIRE.
man, alth ough he SAYS he worked only two
thirds of the time; hut that only showcd
that the superintendent had soul if the
defendant did not.
Motion overruied. Received December
2s, 1892
SrAtI ". DAVID BrrLHR, ~ AL-.
RgscRirr Three persons were indicted
Jointly for an assault upon a fourth whe
was also Indicated for eonieuporancou'
assault upon them. the alleged assaults he.
ing but one occurrence. On the trial Of tho
three Correspondents the prosecuting officer
persisted in say ing to the jury. against th,
objection of the respondents AMI without
remembrance from the court, that If those
respondents should be convicted he woald
discontinue the other Indictment
Held. that the introduction of such ex
;raneous issue would have been cause fol
a new tfi1i hal not the judge in lis chsrgs
so explained the matter to the jury as 10 re-
move ell prejudice probably oecasionct
thereby.
Exceptions o,erruied. Reed Dec. ~
Iaao w s G.