Court Opinion

ID: 9671360
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 03:35:08.976043+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:09.516642
License: Public Domain

Wilkie, J.
(dissenting in part). I respectfully dissent from that portion of the majority opinion affirming the judgment denying any recovery to Lopez. The trial court thought the jury verdict as to Lopez “appears to be a very harsh outcome.” Indeed it is. It is a wholly unjust ending to a tragic drama in which Lopez, obviously injured in the accident, is denied any recovery for his broken hand simply because he did not appear at the trial to give evidence of this fact. Justice has miscarried. True, there is some slight evidence which would support a jury determination that he had not injured his hand in the accident. The police officer who investigated the accident was not aware of any injuries to the passengers of the cars. The driver of the second car observed no injuries. Yet the jury, while denying any recovery to Lopez, found that Segura was injured in the same accident. The jury was punishing Lopez for his nonappearance. Although we are reluctant to order a new trial in the interest of justice under sec. 251.09, Stats., this is obviously a case where such a new trial should be ordered.
I have been authorized to state that Mr. Chief Justice Hallows joins in this opinion.