The herald., 1896-12-22
WRONG MATTER INTRODUCED.
The Supreme Court Reverses Decision
in Local Battery Case.

The supreme court has handed down
I decision in the case of Bernabe Ba-
dostain. respondent. VS.. Francisco Gra-
eide, appellant. carried up on appeal
from Judge Shaw's department, this
county. The plaintiff had verdict and
Judgment for damages for an assault
and battery committed upon him by de-
fendant. 1t was in evidence at the trial
that plaintiff had been in the employ of
defendant for about eight months next
before the battery, during which time
he had kept a horse on pasture at de-
fendant's premises; on settlement of ac-
counts defendant deducted from the
wages due him the sum of S12 for pas
turage of the horse. Plaintiff testified
that when he began work he told the de-
fendant he wanted the horse pastured
at the place. and defendant replied 'All
right" that he (plaintiff) did not expect
to pay for pasturage; that he told de-
fendant when the latter proposed to
make the deduction from his wages that
it was more than the horse was worth;
that thereupon the defendant became
enraged and struck him in the face.
On behalf of the defendant there was
evidence that he gave to plaintiff an or
der or draft for the wages due him, less
said charge for pasturage, which plain
tiff accepted but at the same time an
grily applied to the defendant an OBJ
scene and insulting epithet; that this
occurred in the presence and hearing of
defendants wife and two young daugh-
ters; that the conversation was AMIGA
bic until plaintiff addressed to defend
ant the obscene language, and that the
latter being thus incensed struck the
blow described by plaintiff and which
occasioned the suit.
On cross examination of defendant by
plaintiffs counsel he stated that there
had been no agreement to pasture plain
tiff's horse without pay. In rebuttal
plaintiff testified that defendant had so
promised when he went to work for
him. All the evedence concerning the
terms of the contract about pasturage
was admitted over the objection and eX-
ception of defendant. The court in
structed the jury. among other matters.
that if they believed from the evidence
that defendant committed a battery,
that is, wrongfully used force and vio-
lence upon the person of plaintiff in a
malicious manner. that is in manner
that showed he intended to vex, injure
and annoy him, and that plaintiff was
injured and damaged thereby, then you
! in fixing the damages should not be
| confined to the actual damage sustained,
| but may give in addition exemplary
| damages also that in case of personal
might have been brought, exemplary
Ciamages may be recovered in a civil
| suit"
| The supreme court holds that the
trial court erred in admitting evidence
of the agreement relative to pasturing
| the horse-a matter long past and not
| requisite to the proper comprehension
! OF the case. 1t is said that evidence of
an agreement to pasture the horse with
| out charge was admitted in the present
case i'll order to show the animus of the
defendant and justify the visitation of
! punitive damages on him. the answer
| is that if he was in the wrong in de-
harding pay for pasturage, his wrong
lay in the breach of contract to be re-
dressed in an action thereon, and not
| confounded with the breach of an obli-
| cation of wholly different nature, viz:
to abstain from injury to PLAINTIFF
person.
The charge that "in case of personal