Court Opinion

ID: 9725257
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 11:37:21.895812+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:13.052323
License: Public Domain

*447Currie, Hallows, and Wilkie, JJ.
(dissenting). We agree with the majority that the sole issue to be considered on this appeal is whether or not the damage verdict of $10,000 is excessive. We are satisfied that the entire record viewed most favorably to the plaintiff 1 does not support the verdict.2 We consider the verdict excessive and would invoke the Powers rule,3 thus ordering a new trial but granting an option to the plaintiff to take such lesser sum as the court would consider reasonable.
The majority opinion states that, “The testimony in this action indicates that the injury complained of was substantially revealed by subjective symptoms.” Indeed, the only permanent injury testified to here was the pain arising from the aggravation of a pre-existing narrowing of the inter-vertebral disc.
While we agree with the rules quoted by the majority from the O’Brien and Springen Cases, supra, we are of the opinion that the award is beyond the range of reasonably debatable amounts 4 for such pain as may be attributable to the aggravation of the pre-existing condition. For this reason we believe that the verdict is excessive despite the fact that the trial court has approved the award.

 Kincannon v. National Indemnity Co. (1958), 5 Wis. (2d) 231, 92 N. W. (2d) 884.

 Cases in which this court, since the Powers rule, has found the verdict excessive and not supported by the evidence are: Powers v. Allstate Ins. Co. (1960), 10 Wis. (2d) 78, 102 N. W. (2d) 393; Beijer v. Beijer (1960), 11 Wis. (2d) 207, 105 N. W. (2d) 348; Teufel v. Home Indemnity Co. (1961), 15 Wis. (2d) 67, 111 N. W. (2d) 893; Freuen v. Brenner (1962), 16 Wis. (2d) 445, 114 N. W. (2d) 782; Albers v. Herman Mut. Ins. Co. (1962), 17 Wis. (2d) 385, 117 N. W. (2d) 364.

 Powers v. Allstate Ins. Co., supra.

 Makowski v. Ehlenbach (1960), 11 Wis. (2d) 38, 103 N. W. (2d) 907.