Case Name: KATHRYN E. CORVIN et al., Respondents, v. VICTOR HYATT et al., Appellants
Court: District Court of Appeal of the State of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1935-11-09
Citations: 10 Cal. App. 2d 107
Docket Number: Civ. No. 10540
Parties: KATHRYN E. CORVIN et al., Respondents, v. VICTOR HYATT et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Appellate Reports, Second Series
Volume: 10
Pages: 107–108

Head Matter:
[Civ. No. 10540.
Second Appellate District, Division Two.
November 9, 1935.]
KATHRYN E. CORVIN et al., Respondents, v. VICTOR HYATT et al., Appellants.
George L. Greer for Appellants.
J. Howard Corvin for Respondents.

Opinion:
McCOMB, J., pro tem.
This is an appeal by defendants from a judgment in favor of plaintiffs after a trial before a jury.
The sole question presented for determination is:
Was the verdict of the jury for $5,000 excessive damages, as the decedent was seventy-seven years of age, the mother of plaintiffs, who devoted most of her time, services, society, comfort, and counsel to one of her daughters with whom she lived for twenty-two years?
The jury's verdict will not be set aside upon appeal on the ground that the damages are excessive, unless the verdict is so outrageously excessive as to suggest at the first blush, passion, prejudice or corruption. (Bach v." C. Swanston & Son, 105 Cal. App. 72, 83 [286 Pac. 1097]; Eerrison v. Unger, 135 Cal. App. 607, 612 [27 Pac. (2d) 927].) In the instant case the amount of the award does not fall in this category.
The judgment is affirmed.
Crail, P. J., and Wood, J., concurred.
A petition for a rehearing of this cause was denied by the District Court of Appeal on November 14, 1935, and an application by appellants to have the cause heard in the Supreme Court, after judgment in the District Court of Appeal, was denied by the Supreme Court on January 6, 1936.