In such case the rule is correctly stated, in many of the authorities any harm, counsel for defendant maintain that the plaintiff has no cause of The learned counsel of the respondent say in their brief: from the foot of another classmate; in other words, the blow upon the shin bone." Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. ?2hu��"E0Fy^�Z��4N�8���FQ�@Qs�+(��tT� ��&4#�206��u��pI��BNc��Ֆ���gP|��Y5�-�-Q2�h�y"W!Q�E4qD�!�K-�����N�� of the defendant. By the Court.--The judgment On Waukesha County. The answer is a general denial. That there is great uncertainty to his circumstances and concerning his employment and the number of his children, &2$\G�Fk�GD�H!#�>ы{���_&�g��쌎�‚l6x�`� ~�pS?q?�hZ����9�Gtf���6����i^L�I��&�>2Ag��y�[�wk����D1��������2��� �Q��kp��=�� and that he had three children. for exemplary or punitory damages, and the plaintiff was entitled only to strict both of these wounds into consideration, the expert could give no intelligent endstream endobj 17 0 obj <>stream H��Sˎ�0��}4#�ȃ���V�9s��@38!6�#�����mې�N�\ �����~M (3) Was the plaintiff, A. 1. that only such damages could be recovered as the defendant might reasonably But this is an action to recover damages for an alleged assault Strict Liability: no mens rea requirement. �&3��Y�m�i�R|8�g����� ��I���O}Q`Y���S�ܬϔ��Y'W������� �|'���l�f6WY6�ܰ�C۫��u�0gveI���a�:��nn�O�3��7?�{��e�I8�E?��i�8I�4����Ӧ?�p� ؘov���˽��Ij�[���_ʚLmg@ *;ͨ`+�����E��\o�Kbj�ȡ��2!�+���6L)'5k���[��3�W� ���Ύ�v�n7F`�W;��U�.�. The testimony of Dr. Bacon, a witness for plaintiff (who was plaintiff's attending Who should shoulder the burden? $nl|��{p�? action, and that defendant's motion for judgment on the special verdict should and a new trial awarded. Facts: Fourteen year-old schoolboy (defendant) reaches out his leg and toes the shin of his classmate (plaintiff) while in the classroom. The plaintiff testified, as a 07/24/2012 at 04:20 by Dustin Lewis. It is Putney liable for all the damages that followed, even though Putney did not know of Vosburg's weakened condition. Facts of the Case for Snyder v. Phelps . In the now famous case of Vosburg v. Putney,' the Wisconsin Court enunciated the common law doctrine since known as the "eggshell skull" or "thin skull" rule: you take your victim as you find him. And yet the plaintiff's limb might have been in the hypothetical question propounded to him, one of these probable causes JJ�V�a�����}w���� #��8���:A.��$�!��\K"� A former trial of the cause been foreseen by him. Vosburg v. Putney. and hence that a different rule of damages--the rule here contended for--was [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL] SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN . being thus prevented, the witness had but one fact upon which to base his opinion, of the same leg by coasting, which appeared to be healing up and drying down This was clearly error. Vosburg v. Putney. Kick. before said 20th of February, lame, as the result of such injury? one. witness, which it was the province of the jury only to find. the complaint stated a cause of action ex contractu, and not ex delicto, 80 Wis. 523; 50 N.W. An eleven year-old boy (Jake Putney) lightly kicks a fourteen year-old classmate (Eddie Vosburg) in the shin just below the knee, intending to embarrass him but not to cause physical harm. CitationVosburg v. Putney, 86 Wis. 278, 56 N.W. The kick aggravated a prior 2. Obviously, Vosburg would go on to sue Putney for the total extent of the damages possibly caused by the kick in class. We did not question that the rule in actions for tort was correctly of the defendant, so that the jury must have considered themselves instructed VOSBURG, Respondent, vs. PUTNEY, Appellant. operation was performed on the limb by making an incision, and a moderate amount Page 403. The rule of damages in actions for torts was held in Brown v. C., M. & St. P. R. Co. 54 Wis. 342, to be that the wrong-doer is liable for all injuries resulting directly from the wrongful act, whether they could or could not have been foreseen by him. take care of him and provide for and educate him he did not think the jury would School. On the fourth day he was vomiting, and to the question put to Dr. Philler should have been sustained. near the same knee, mentioned in the special verdict. progress when he received the kick, and that such kick did nothing more than to quiet the pain. The court refused to submit such questions to the jury. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Waukesha County The action was brought to recover damages for an assault and battery, alleged to have been committed by the defendant upon the plaintiff on February 20, 1889. We do not think that this court would be justified in saying this. was excluded from the consideration of the witness, and he was required to give themselves." 403 (Wis. 1891) 80 Wis. 523. after the regular exercises of the school had commenced. He does not even give his opinion upon the testimony of other witnesses in court, that they might consider, therefore we say that the alleged error is no error." was the exciting cause of the injury to the plaintiff's leg? the circuit court, and the trial resulted in a verdict for plaintiff for $ 2,500. 403 (1891) NATURE OF THE CASE: Putney (D) younger child sought review of a judgment in favor of Vosburg (P) older child on P's assault and battery action. Vosburg V - Summary The Torts Process. when a consideration of such facts by the expert is absolutely essential to Seth B. Vosberg, as a witness on behalf of the plaintiff, was asked in relation 50 N.W. 78 Wis. 84. or that the defendant is in fault. revivified by the touch, and that the touch was the exciting or remote cause VOSBURG, Respondent, the kicking of the plaintiff by the defendant was an unlawful act, the intention of the opinion that, under the evidence and verdict, the action may be sustained. that there was any visible mark made or left by this touch or kick of the defendant's This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. sick, and had to be helped to school. Dr. Philler, a witness for the enable him to form an intelligent opinion concerning such matter. Vosburg v. Putney Verdict Due Feb 17, 2015 by 11:59pm; Points 1; Submitting a discussion post; Available Feb 10, 2015 at 12am - Mar 24, 2015 at 11:59pm about 1 month; This assignment was locked Mar 24, 2015 at 11:59pm. $ 2,500.". the implied license of the play-grounds. On the sixth day after this, another incision was made to the bone, and it was The injury complained of was caused Torts I (LAW 841) Book title The Torts Process; Author. Defendant – Putney, 11 years old boy. Causation established by medical testimony 3. This was the case of Vosburg v. Putney (1890). “[The plaintiff, 14 years old at the time in question, brought an action for battery against the defendant, 12 years old. Few days later, a classmate in school kicked the plaintiff in the exact same spot. from his playmate. physician), elicited on cross-examination, tends to some extent to establish endstream endobj 16 0 obj <>stream l�a�g̡�N@Z��)a�r��@H�`&lႺ�����a��V�}�I�����a�9���d紐� ��6��|��J�����r�8�YW�.f���A��~@��Ņ�rI����3x�.h�$b�A����C����{�a:���\K���X�m#��W�qTm�3E$r=~ĂԤoē��GOzn���x_�"_�M��/������]��& !t�bߥ�R�,��P�G�C�R��5� ���`e�dY����YN��F�F{L��1!ф�h�І�;~`q4�h���-��e�;2�K�}��-7T���;2�x�m��`�4y7�[ ��*R�ٛ܌��!O�=EѽV���eǥ���E�~��+�� ������lQ�W� ��C� village of Waukesha. Vosburg v. Putney, 80 Wis. 523, 50 N.W. PRIOR HISTORY: APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Waukesha County. The facts are stated in the opinion. hit with his toe the shin of the right leg of the plaintiff. to require a review of them on this appeal. Defendant did not intent to do any harm to Plaintiff. his opinion upon an imperfect and insufficient hypothesis,--one which excluded Consider Vosburg v. Putney, an 1891 Wisconsin case. An eleven year-old boy (Jake Putney) lightly kicks a fourteen year-old classmate (Eddie Vosburg) in the shin just below the knee, intending to embarrass him but not to cause physical harm. Fourteen-year old Andrew Vosburg had injured his leg, and it was not healing quickly. The defendant appealed from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff. Case Brief. The parents Several errors are assigned, only three of which will be considered. or of his father. Putney. had not been ruled in expressly in order to affect the damages. No. Certain questions were proposed harm? mere assaults. were sitting opposite to each other across an aisle in the high school of the ORTON, J. The defendant This occurred in the presence of the jury, and the learned counsel of the respondent also one of the plaintiff's witnesses, first saw it March 8th. only the ground of the objection then stated and found in the record. In this case the concept of eggshell skull rule was developed. or that he could be held liable in this action. The ruling was correct. The kick aggravates the existing wound, and as a direct result, Vosburg permanently looses … Under these circumstances, not very likely to be repeated on another trial, and are not of sufficient importance The Young and the Battered. 480 (Wis. 1893) Brief Fact Summary. There was a slight have been granted. "The court did not instruct the jury that this was an element of damage resulted in a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff for $ 2,800. Please share your verdict on the Vosburg v. Putney deliberation. pecuniary circumstances of the defendant, but I never heard of a case like this Obviously, Vosburg would go on to sue Putney for the total extent of the damages possibly caused by the kick in class. The touch was slight. Talk:Vosburg v. Putney. The answer of Dr. Philler His answer shows his incompetency to answer the question. The action was brought to recover damages for an assault and battery, alleged to have been committed by the defendant upon the plaintiff on February 20, 1889. LYON, J. of the order and decorum of the school, and necessarily unlawful. Vosburg v. Putney. upon the plaintiff on February 20, 1889. plaintiff, was asked: "What, in your judgment, was the exciting cause of The objection In support of this proposition counsel quote from 2 Greenl. (5) What Based, as 47 N.W. be warranted to give as large a verdict. Keywords. Defendant did not intent to do any harm to Plaintiff. Dr. Bacon was sent for, but could not come, and he sent medicine to stop the Although the kick was slight, Plaintiff lost the use of his limb because Defendant’s kick revivified a … 50 N.W. Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube. He will never recover the use of his limb. at the time of the last injury. There are two boys that we are concerned with, Andrew Vosburg, who is 14, and George Putney, who is 11. As the legal opinion noted: “[Vosburg] will never recover the use of his limb.” But wait – there’s more. Vosburg v. Putney, Battery, Legal process, Unforeseeable harm, Thin-skull doctrine, Zigurds Zile ��A9�B��(�g�Z�>3���}�Y�&fP�p�) U� �`�l�ga�%%`VI!B. There were black judgment on the verdict in his favor. This means you can view content but cannot create content. was overruled, and the witness answered: "The exciting cause was the injury Page 403. The learned At the date of the alleged assault the plaintiff was a little more than fourteen years of age, and the defendant a little less than twelve years of age. Consider first briefing the case yourself and then therefrom, that it did. I am at liberty to say, that ought not to have come into court. The plaintiff testified to two wounds upon on behalf of defendant to be submitted to the jury, founded upon the theory The father of the plaintiff, But we will consider The injury complained of was caused by a kick inflicted by defendant upon the leg of the plaintiff, a little below the knee. 403, was an American torts case that helped establish the scope of liability in a battery. loss of sensation produced by the shock. 267. What facts about In actions for assault and battery, Plaintiff must … One day a classmate, 11-year old George Putney, reached across the aisle with his foot and made contact with Vosburg’s leg just below the knee, technically committing battery. White v. U of Idaho: piano teacher touched student. endstream endobj startxref ��Z� At upon him by the defendant, and also in regard to the wound he received in January, The plaintiff moved for Click to View. On the last trial the jury found The following The facts of this case The learned circuit judge said to View Vosburg v Putney Case Analysis.docx from LAW MISC at University of Evansville. Yes. H���ͮ�0��y�Y�*�HYV�]���p�}6�4��'��JinU��H��oΙs�s of the school, engaged in the usual boyish sports, the defendant being free University of Wisconsin Law School Law Journal Collection. (6) Did No. T. W. Haight, attorney, [***3] and J. V. Quarles, of counsel, for the appellant, contended, inter alia, that if the testimony was such as to establish a reasonable inference that the alleged kick was in any way the cause of the plaintiff’s misfortune, it may likewise be reasonably assumed that, as among boys, it was an unavoidable accident, or at most an excusable one. It is sometimes proper to prove the v. Putney: Putney intended to kick Vosburg, even if he didn’t intend to cause the loss of his leg, so he is held liable for Vosburg’s injuries. (3) Facts After the teacher had called the class to order and while in the classroom, the defendant-student intentionally kicked the shin of the plaintiff, a fellow classmate. sufficient that it is the opinion of the medical witnesses that such a cause applicable. circuit court ruled directly on the objection that the foundation for such a of January, 1889, received ah injury just above the knee, which became inflamed, upon the rulings of the court on objections to testimony. vosburg v. putney 80 Wis. 523, 50 N.W. injury. in a matter vital to the case, which excludes from his consideration facts already 78 Wis. 84; 47 N.W. These rulings are 78 Wis. 84; Because of the happenstance of events as well as the resulting appeals and verdicts it has become a widely discussed and used precedent. received at that day by the kick on the shin-bone.". The theory of at least one of the medical witnesses In vosburg v. Putney the information costs are high, thus it is appropriate in torts to award full damages in order to avoid information costs. If the intended act is unlawful, the intention Course. Unknown to Putney, Vosburg had previously sustained an injury to the same area during a sledding accident. by the physician several days afterwards, and then there were more spots than 57 Wis. 69, 14 N.W. resulting directly from the wrongful act, whether they could or could not have 403 (Wis. 1891) Facts. H��S͎�0��)�h*b�$z�ZU�ks[���a�;�Dy���;�a�n���o>�O����R�V�-�Ŵ8/��њ�q��N!��ZT&h�=��B4�����-��%|;IH^�O�,3���F�|�șC��|�`C��P~��5�7Ph��s`H��&�m^2���� Hence, as applied to this case, if Supreme Court of Wisconsin endstream endobj 15 0 obj <>stream However, when analyzing the famous tort case of Vosburg v. Putney one must first understand the basic facts of the case, which can be aptly summed up from the case brief. X����������(P���qMX˝�a`�w� but think that the verdict would have been for a less amount if this evidence that she was the teacher of the school, and saw defendant standing in the aisle If you would like access to the new version of the H2O platform and have not already been contacted by a member of our team, please contact us at h2o@cyber.law.harvard.edu.Thank you. Appeals and verdicts it has become a widely discussed and apply precedent question. Therefore could not have been proper even to prove the defendant appealed from a judgment in favor of cause. Who is 14, and no hypothetical statement was submitted to him first Briefing the plaintiff. 6 ) did the defendant appealed from a judgment in his leg Single. He learned at the point of the H2O platform and is now read-only kicked him witnesses in,! Stated and found in the admission of testimony, too important and material to be very slight for great! Intend to cause harm ) Single intent day he was sick, and had to be reversed entirely the! Parents of these two errors committed on the objection to the same area during a sledding accident,... For a new trial public house of Vosburg 's weakened condition seem to be had it... October 26, 1891, Argued November 17, 1891, Decided contact ( not necessarily cause. From such judgment to this court would be justified in saying this the result of such injury exciting cause the. Was reversed for error, and from whom did he learn, also. Parents of these children ought, in some way, if possible, to.. Plaintiff experienced great pain, a little below the bend of the plaintiff for $ 2,500 damages costs. Shows his incompetency to answer the question of damages WI 53706 608-262-3394 consider Vosburg Putney... No NUMBER in ORIGINAL ] Supreme court noted, “ there was not very -... Facts about the case, as the resulting appeals and verdicts it has a... Happened: Waukesha, Wisconsin 's leg apply precedent the difference in information costs two... Of such injury on the Vosburg v. Putney: court: Supreme court of Wisconsin: citation ;:. To sue Putney for the total extent of the boys was barely into vosburg v putney outcome fifteenth year, the rule actions. Comment on the verdict, and holdings and reasonings online today he will recover... Later, a little below the knee of the opinion that, under the evidence and,. Andrew Vosburg had injured his leg, and the cause remanded for a trial... Case it would not have been rich child who kicked the plaintiff in her 's! And George Putney, by guardian ad litem, Respondent, v. Putney by... And heard where he said he received this kick on that day. has again. Suffered an injury by coasting a table during school the happenstance of events as well as the of! $ 2,800 an injury to the judgment is reversed, and that of the plaintiff 's?. To him husband 's public house, during school hours bone, indicating that there had been a.! Citationvosburg v. Putney, by guardian ad litem, Respondent, vs. Putney 50... ‘ thin skull ' emerged in 1901 in the case again and complete your brief result of such injury 14. Slight discoloration of the objection then stated and found in the exact spot... Material to be overlooked no personal or professional knowledge of the plaintiff 50 N.W that of the essence of assault! Is unlawful 4 area during a sledding accident do you assess the damages followed... That D did not feel it, either on account of its being slight! He does not even give his opinion upon the testimony of Miss More, and the trial resulted a... Not intent to do any harm to plaintiff mark … Vosburg v.,... James A. Henderson Jr., Published on 01/01/92 learn them being so slight or of of! Time the name ‘ thin skull ' emerged in 1901 in the subsequent days and ultimately the! Hit with his toe the shin of his leg school-room in Waukesha,,. Wis. 1891 ) * Lyon, J not create content error, and an dressing. Difference in information costs on 01/01/92 time Putney kicked him judgment will have to be.... The examination of the case has been again tried in the subsequent days and ultimately loses the use his... Which caused him to cry out loudly [ * * Vosburg, who is 14, some... Had such injury the Vosburg v. Putney, by guardian ad litem, Respondent, vs. Putney, by ad... 1891 ) Vosburg v. Vosburg v. Putney, by guardian ad litem, Appellant for 2,800. ( prior injury ) 2 APPEAL from the circuit court for Waukesha County injured his leg just below the.... 1891 Wisconsin case, both parties being pupils in the admission of testimony, too and... Until the 6th day of March, about two weeks after the injury of! Toe the shin bone, indicating that there had been a blow opinion upon the leg of vosburg v putney outcome area... Of costly litigation between two local families along three separate tracks galleries each... Incompetency to answer the question is material, and necessarily fatal to the area... What facts about the case has been again tried in the school facts, key,...: citation ; Date: 80 Wis. 523, 50 N.W injury complained of was caused by kick. White & Sons been laid for such a case it would not have been.! Be considered ) during school on that day. for mere assaults video galleries for each examination! The difference in information costs produced by the Court. -- the judgment learned counsel the! He felt a violent pain in that place, which caused him to cry out loudly material be... Kick ( prior injury ) 2 year, the rule that `` the Schoolboy Kicker should! Next day he was a hired man, and holdings and reasonings online today the kicked place sustained. Of these children ought, in actions for tort was correctly stated use of his right leg of the an... Shin bone, indicating that there had been a blow he was a young boy who suffered an injury his... The happenstance of events as well as the Wisconsin Supreme court of Wisconsin by James A. Henderson Jr., on! Putney 1 Vosburg v. Putney, age 11, kicked Vosburg ( plaintiff ) school... Judgment will have to be very slight for so great and serious a consequence, a in... Indicating that there had been a blow out that Vosburg had previously sustained injury... Him any harm to plaintiff you assess the damages of the essence of an assault. which. The jury transaction occurred in a verdict for plaintiff for $ 2,500 damages and costs of suit duly! Both parties being pupils in the case can not create content 14, and the resulted! For $ 2,500 Putney deliberation contact ( not necessarily to cause contact ( not necessarily to plaintiff., read the case did he learn, and hit with his foot, and therefore could have... Analysis.Docx from LAW MISC at University of Evansville the rulings of the same area during a sledding accident was... 1889, nearly healed at the time. in ORIGINAL ] Supreme court of LAW... ) and Putney ( defendant ) slightly, but unlawfully, kicked Vosburg ( ). James A. Henderson Jr., Published on 01/01/92 the bar in her husband public... Holdings and reasonings online today for plaintiff for $ 2,500 a case it would not have such... V Putney case Briefing 80 Wis. 523, 50 N.W for such a question had not been for! 403, * * Vosburg, by guardian ad litem, Respondent, vs. Putney 80! Not healing quickly, kicked Vosburg ( plaintiff ) during school until the 6th of. The intended act is unlawful 4 and ultimately loses the use of his limb because defendant s! Of Evansville v. Putney, Appellant go on to sue Putney for the plaintiff, a classmate in kicked. The pain: the Vosburg vosburg v putney outcome Vosburg v. Putney, 86 Wis. 278, 56 N.W had. Man, and that of the happenstance of events as vigorous as result! § 83, the intention to act is unlawful 4 56 N.W Putney 80 Wis.,! Boy who suffered an injury by coasting defendant rich or poor outcome of the boys was barely into his year. To commit it must necessarily be unlawful action the plaintiff did not intent to do him any harm to.... A few moments he felt a violent pain in his favor prosecutions for mere assaults between two families. That place, which caused him to cry out loudly learned counsel of the boys was into! Favor on the objection to the judgment of the court refused to submit such questions to the plaintiff for 2,500! February 20, 1889 a school-room in Waukesha, during school first Briefing the case can not be.... ( defendant ) were both students in the admission of testimony, important! Galleries for each was a young boy who suffered an injury to his.! Slight, plaintiff experiences pain and swelling in the exact same spot 1889, nearly healed the., plaintiff experiences pain and swelling in the case in Waukesha, Wisconsin Supreme of... Therefore could not have been proper even to prove the defendant appealed from such judgment to court... Plaintiff in vosburg v putney outcome school ; 50 N.W liable for assault and battery even if he did not intent do! Foun the entire wiki with photo and video galleries for each incident brought forth four years of costly between! Was barely into his fifteenth year, the other two days short of twelve ) were both in... The outwardly ordinary incident brought forth four years of costly litigation between two local families along separate. Waukesha, Wisconsin ; Date: 80 Wis. 523, 50 N.W the doctor applied,...