Case Name: CATHERINE HENNESSY. vs. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Court: Supreme Court of the District of Columbia
Jurisdiction: District of Columbia
Decision Date: 1890-06-23
Citations: 8 Mackey 220
Docket Number: Nos. 26,661
Parties: CATHERINE HENNESSY. vs. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
Judges: Justices Hagner, Cox and James sitting.
Reporter: Reports of cases argued and determined in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia (District of Columbia - reported by Mackey)
Volume: 19
Pages: 220–220

Head Matter:
CATHERINE HENNESSY. vs. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
Measure op Damages ; Neglect op Plaintipp to Follow Physi.cian’s Instructions; Reduction op Verdict by the Court.
In an action to recover damages for a permanent injury to plaintiff’s arm if it appear that the permanency of the injury was largely brought about by the neglect of the plaintiff to follow the instructions of her physician in the care of the injured limb, the verdict should be reduced accordingly.
At Law.
Nos. 26,661.
Decided June 23, 1890.
Justices Hagner, Cox and James sitting.
Motion by defendant for a new trial on a bill of exceptions and case. Judgment reversed, unless plaintiff remit ■one-half of the verdict of $3,000.
Messrs. T. A. Lambert and W. H. Sholes for plaintiff.
Mr. A. G. Riddle for the defendant.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice James
delivered the opinion of the Court:
This cause is appealed on a case stated. The plaintiff recovered a judgment for $3,000 for injuries suffered by means of the defendant's negligence in allowing a dangerous defect in a sidewalk to remain unrepaired and unguarded. The verdict was evidently based upon a finding that the injury to the plaintiff ?s arm was permanent, and that this extent of the injury was the natural consequence of the original injury. We find that the physician who attended the plaintiff testified that it needed not to be permanent ; that the plaintiff refused to follow his instructions to use her arm, and that such use would have made it more serviceable. We are convinced by an examination of the evidence that the plaintiff herself caused a large part of the results of "the injury shown at the trial, and that the verdict is therefore excessive in contemplation of law. If a remittitur of $1,500 is entered the judgment will stand affirmed ; otherwise a new trial will he ordered.