hours, both parties being pupils in the school. University of Wisconsin Law Library 975 Bascom Mall Madison, WI 53706 608-262-3394 FEATURE VOSBURG v. PUTNEY A CENTENNIAL STORY ZIGURDS L. ZILE On February 20, 1889, an incident between two boys occurred in a classroom in Waukesha, Wisconsin. Unknown to Putney, Vosburg had previously sustained an injury to the same area during a sledding accident. Luning v. State,
the jury had the right to find, from the evidence and reasonable inferences
vomiting, and came to see him the next day, on the 25th. judgment on the verdict in his favor. School. The plaintiff testified to two wounds upon
$nl|��{p�? By the Court.--The judgment
Plaintiff-appellee (Vosburg) is a child who was kicked and subsequently rendered lame by the defendant. �&3��Y�m�i�R|8�g�����
��I���O}Q`Y���S�ܬϔ��Y'W������� �|'���l�f6WY6�ܰ�C۫��u�0gveI���a�:��nn�O�3��7?�{��e�I8�E?��i�8I�4����Ӧ?�p� ؘov���˽��Ij�[���_ʚLmg@ *;ͨ`+�����E��\o�Kbj�ȡ��2!�+���6L)'5k���[��3�W� ���Ύ�v�n7F`�W;��U�.�. The learned counsel of the plaintiff stated that he wanted
Putney, age 11, kicked Vosburg, age 14, in the leg during school. to quiet the pain. "���օP�D��tG����r�?����Z���ZF��ϓ�q�Xa����ֹ�{�F��:��!W��ȶ�(��}[8O�$�p��O�cX�`��=x(�����������*x��]z@=�ᏦT~5Ĥ�o��@� ����
403 (Wisc. which will tolerate a hypothetical question to an expert, calling for his opinion
that such wound was the proximate cause of the injury to plaintiff's leg, in
by a kick inflicted by defendant upon the leg of the plaintiff, a little below
The Young and the Battered. ��P���&2^χ�� �
�
Several errors are assigned,
The facts are stated in the opinion. The facts of this case
1. '5�Ӣ���¢� �(��ni�ȞS���&�)X��֚`�o���vR�� ��W�/����R�)kQ�(�^���8���%��ʕ���t��e^�!hd0c.b�w���K�_����,%z0v����C7�_Q8m���:O�>�����|���௱&�a�+;��G�ㆿ!�:�2J���/�����R�-]��"a!�� The answer is a general denial. The learned counsel of the appellant now contends further that the question
to give the plaintiff greater damages in consequence of the poverty of his father. Under these circumstances,
We do not think that this court would be justified in saying this. Get Vosburg v. Putney, 50 N.W. Although the kick was slight, Plaintiff lost the use of his limb because Defendant’s kick revivified a previous injury. That case rules this on the question of damages. 78 Wis. 84;
Obviously, Vosburg would go on to sue Putney for the total extent of the damages possibly caused by the kick in class. to show the situation of the family, and if the father was able to educate the
But perfect certainty is not required. Vosburg v. Putney, Battery, Legal process, Unforeseeable harm, Thin-skull doctrine, Zigurds Zile have been granted. He will never recover the use of his limb. knowledge of the case until the 6th day of March, about two weeks after the
Facts The plaintiff was a young boy who suffered an injury to his leg just below the knee. It is a very
2. h�Ė_o�0���[M���8��JPJ�6Zu�!�F The testimony of Dr. Bacon, a witness for plaintiff (who was plaintiff's attending
themselves." 80 Wis. 523; 50 N.W. being thus prevented, the witness had but one fact upon which to base his opinion,
During school, defendant kicked plaintiff slightly to shin of his right leg without intending to harm. 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. be overlooked. resulting directly from the wrongful act, whether they could or could not have
Contact. 480 (Wis. 1893) Brief Fact Summary. This was objected to by the learned counsel
Defendant is liable for assault and battery even if he did not intend to cause plaintiff harm by touching his leg. h�bbd```b``�"�@$�f��D2w�eC��X��.�+���EjA���@��"شh�V� $������q&X���L�?��o �e3
Here’s what happened: Waukesha, Wisconsin, February 20, 1889. A drainage tube was inserted, and an iodoform dressing put on. the kicking of the plaintiff by the defendant was an unlawful act, the intention
compensatory damages in case he recovered in the action. Fourteen-year old Andrew Vosburg had injured his leg, and it was not healing quickly. 1891). mere assaults. his leg, either of which might have been such proximate cause. 40 0 obj
<>stream
of Andrew Vosburg in regard to how he received the kick, February 20th,
Hence we are
However, when analyzing the famous tort possibility of Vosburg v. Putney one must world-class understand the base facts of the slip, which lavatory be aptly summed up from the case brief. On the
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. It will be observed that the above
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. and what you know of the case of the boy, seeing it on the 8th day of March,
that there was any visible mark made or left by this touch or kick of the defendant's
Defendant-appellant (Putney) is the child who kicked the plaintiff. Course. have been agreed that this touch or kick was the exciting cause of the injury
Vosburg v. Putney. H���ͮ�0��y�Y�*�HYV�]���p�}6�4��'��JinU��H��oΙs�s ��iSA!������(�Gf�O���=������}sam-�q�,�Pc�ᓑ[�S6:�
� Consider Vosburg v. Putney, an 1891 Wisconsin case. If the intended act is unlawful, the intention
On January 12st, he had “received an injury just above the knee of the same leg by coasting. Putney (Defendant) slightly, but unlawfully, kicked Vosburg (Plaintiff) during school. The case involved an incident that occurred in February 1889 in Waukesha, Wisconsin. Defendant did not intent to do any harm to Plaintiff. Although the kick was slight, Plaintiff lost the use of his limb because Defendant’s kick revivified a … November 5, 1890, Decided . endstream
endobj
11 0 obj
<>
endobj
12 0 obj
<>
endobj
13 0 obj
<>stream
question was then propounded to Dr. Philler: "After hearing that testimony,
But, intention to act is sufficient, when act is unlawful 4. We have much of the same feeling about the case. be supposed to have contemplated as likely to result from his kicking the plaintiff. %PDF-1.6
%����
Consider first briefing the case yourself and then The outwardly ordinary incident brought forth four years of costly litigation between two local families along three separate tracks. X����������(P���qMX˝�a`�w� Dr. Philler, a witness for the
of the opinion that, under the evidence and verdict, the action may be sustained. Use your own words whenever possible, but do quote the opinion when the court’s precise language is ... Vosburg v. Putney, and a sample brief of that case. #ғLC�$�lᴣt�廓Y�15�2��M�I�S��r#����*݀�׃�p�����~�Lf�"����{zUV�4w�[�e N�m�g�~��
a4�f�DM�h�AT�֖�� ΅>Hk�6��Q,�UV��mV�:{�������i/��9�F�5m,x��םE�f�/�|{t�^��z.��}$P�M1��g�e/��n�ѐ�0Ԯ1rN� from his consideration a material fact essential to an intelligent opinion. The ruling was correct. Talk:Vosburg v. Putney. The defendant appealed from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The learned counsel of the respondent say in their brief:
Vosburg v. Putney. ?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 same leg by coasting, which appeared to be healing up and drying down
This was clearly error. The plaintiff testified, as a
and battery. inflicted in the school, after it had been called to order by the teacher, and
was overruled, and the witness answered: "The exciting cause was the injury
citation vosburg putney plaintiff defendant (1891) ii. Vosburg v. Putney (Facts) - Vosburg suffered an injury to his leg.-A few days later Putney kicked him lightly in the same spot.-Vosburg did not feel the kick immediately but soon felt pain and underwent surgery.-Vosburg lost the use of the injured leg and brought tort claims against Putney for common law battery. of these children ought, in some way, if possible, to have adjusted it between
The answer of Dr. Philler
or reliable opinion as to which of them caused the injury complained of; yet,
in his favor on the verdict, and also for a new trial. Then, read the case again and complete your brief. The kick aggravates the existing wound, and as a direct result, Vosburg permanently looses … ORTON, J. �U{���)P���Z�I-��f������N���}�Fz��.p�Q�����:q�DH�Ȅ�8wG��R��`d�Oy�ֵ�z���l�g#? However, as plaintiff had an injury by coasting on … Unknown to Putney, Vosburg had previously sustained an injury to the same area during a sledding accident. § 83, the rule that "the intention to do harm is of the essence of
07/24/2012 at 04:21 by Dustin Lewis; 12/04/2014 at 15:12 by miyakawa3; Current Annotated Case 12/04/2014 at 15:12 by miyakawa3; 12/04/2014 at 15:16 by evwayne question had not been sufficiently laid. it necessarily was, on that fact alone, the opinion of Dr. Philler that the
LEXIS 276. The facts of the case, as they appeared on both trials, are sufficiently stated
This occurred in the presence of the jury, and the learned counsel of the respondent
(4)
The action was brought to recover damages for an … The defendant reached across the aisle with his foot, and
Because it turns out that Vosburg had previously injured his leg. These rulings are
the case did he learn, and from whom did he learn them? enable him to form an intelligent opinion concerning such matter. Click to View. Answer. received at that day by the kick on the shin-bone.". 403. 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. Unbeknownst to Putney, Vosburg … ��N���ǽ���P$v܈i'u'�Yu'k�� �mY�XN�M> )��N�P��~湵I��������}�@��/��RG�c�~)�&��fui��X=5�TV��߂��F0�#� +g
The injury complained of was caused by a kick inflicted by defendant upon the leg of the plaintiff, a little below the knee. There are two boys that we are concerned with, Andrew Vosburg, who is 14, and George Putney, who is 11. Vosburg did not feel this kick. 80 Wis. 523;
Keywords. Class is in session. In such a case it would
the complaint stated a cause of action ex contractu, and not ex delicto,
one. 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. Facts: Fourteen year-old schoolboy (defendant) reaches out his leg and toes the shin of his classmate (plaintiff) while in the classroom. Facts The plaintiff was a young boy who suffered an injury to his leg just below the knee. from his playmate. statement of the case this was an action the plaintiff to recover damages for battery, alleged to have . Vosburg v. Putney, 80 Wis. 523, 50 N.W. 99; 1890 Wisc. Vosburg (plaintiff) and Putney (defendant) were both students in the same school in 1889. 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. WikiProject Law (Rated Start-class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it. The learned
submitted to him, his opinion might have been different. And yet the plaintiff's limb might have been
relevant facts: the by his seat, and kicking across the aisle, hitting the plaintiff.) &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��=�� Vosburg v. Putney: A Centennial Story Collections. or that he could be held liable in this action. LYON, J. I heard read the testimony of Miss More, and heard where
Language; Watch; Edit; Active discussions. The plaintiff, if he recovered, was entitled to full compensation
and a new trial awarded. appealed from such judgment to this court, and the same was reversed for error,
The defendant appeals from the judgment. not have been proper even to prove the defendant rich or poor. operation was performed on the limb by making an incision, and a moderate amount
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. The transaction occurred in a school-room in Waukesha, during school
"The court did not instruct the jury that this was an element of damage
pain in that place, which caused him to cry out loudly. Seth B. Vosberg, as a witness on behalf of the plaintiff, was asked in relation
The case has been again tried in
Who should shoulder the burden? from the judgment in that case, chiefly because we were of the opinion that
403 (Wis. 1891), Wisconsin Supreme Court, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. Dr. Philler was
H���͎�0����.�J�FUUiP�`�p��LHm3U��/�k��Q3� The objection
(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. The court refused to submit such questions to the jury. harm? in the hypothetical question propounded to him, one of these probable causes
The ruling was correct. result, according to the medical testimony. in a matter vital to the case, which excludes from his consideration facts already
of the order and decorum of the school, and necessarily unlawful. Defendant – Putney, 11 years old boy.
The remaining errors assigned are
1st day of January before, the plaintiff received an injury just above the knee
On account of these two errors the
permitting the witness to answer the question is material, and necessarily fatal
The parents
It does not appear
Defendant did not intent to do any harm to Plaintiff. On the fourth day he was vomiting, and
Some consideration is due to
The action was brought to recover
of the defendant, so that the jury must have considered themselves instructed
been foreseen by him. Plaintiff kicked the defendant's leg in a classroom, during school hours. ? He is chiefly remembered as the author of Vosburg v. Putney (1890).In the 1855 Wisconsin general election, Republican Coles Bashford narrowly defeated Democrat W. Nature's course allows you to take up to ten months to think about baby names for both baby … Vosburg v. Putney, Battery, Legal process, Unforeseeable harm, Thin-skull doctrine, Zigurds Zile The kick aggravates the existing wound, and as a direct result, Vosburg permanently looses … to the hypothetical question put to him may have had, probably did have, a controlling
to the question put to Dr. Philler should have been sustained. Case Brief. 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. and produced pus? There are two boys that we are concerned with, Andrew Vosburg, who is 14, and George Putney, who is 11. H��Sˎ�0��}4#�ȃ���V�9s��@38!6�#�����mې�N�\ �����~M The injury complained of was caused
discoloration of the skin entirely over the inner surface of the tibia an inch
of defendant to kick him was also unlawful. VOSBURG, by guardian ad litem, Respondent, v. PUTNEY, by guardian ad litem, Appellant. On
Vosburg. Though the touch is slight, plaintiff experiences pain and swelling in the subsequent days and ultimately loses the use of his leg. from the foot of another classmate; in other words, the blow upon the shin bone." 1889, nearly healed at the point of the injury? at the time of the last injury. We cannot
403 (Wisc. Putney (Defendant) slightly, but unlawfully, kicked Vosburg (Plaintiff) during school. In a few moments he felt a violent
This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. 78 Wis. 84. No. are briefly as follows: The plaintiff was about fourteen years of age, and the
He does not even give his opinion upon the testimony of other witnesses in court,
commented on it to the jury by permission of the court against the further objection
57 Wis. 69, 14 N.W. This occurred in a schoolroom while the plaintiff and defendant were sitting across from each other at a table during school hours. only three of which will be considered. 07/24/2012 at 04:20 by Dustin Lewis. 379; Bennett v. State,
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. The rule of damages in actions for torts was held in Brown v. C., M. &
and hence that a different rule of damages--the rule here contended for--was
Hence, as applied to this case, if
Lineage of: Vosburg v. Putney 08/18/2010 at 07:06 by jcochran. his opinion upon an imperfect and insufficient hypothesis,--one which excluded
the defendant, in touching the plaintiff with his foot, intend to do him any
was overruled, and the witness answered: "Under the history I learned at
proved by a witness upon whose testimony such hypothetical question is based,
> VOSBURG v. PUTNEY, 80 Wis. 523 (1891) 80 Wis. 523, *; 50 N.W. a special verdict, as follows: "(1) Had the plaintiff during the month
h�b`````r````01G�� 30D�� L���3I2�1�2�0*-.�3c`��a8�j The theory of at least one of the medical witnesses
A cart crashed into the pub. applicable. That there is great uncertainty
403, ** VOSBURG, by guardian ad litem, Respondent, v. PUTNEY, by guardian ad litem, Appellant. October 26, 1891, Argued November 17, 1891, Decided. sick, and had to be helped to school. also one of the plaintiff's witnesses, first saw it March 8th. ��A9�B��(�g�Z�>3���}�Y�&fP�p�) U� �`�l�ga�%%`VI!B. The defendant moved for judgment
PRIOR HISTORY: APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Waukesha County. he said he received this kick on that day." vs. PUTNEY, Appellant. those of his father. Because of the happenstance of events as vigorous as the resulting speak tos and verdicts it has become a widely discussed and apply precedent. to commit it must necessarily be unlawful. There was a slight
October 20, 1890, Argued . 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. However, Plaintiff experienced great pain, a severe infection, and surgery at the kicked place. years of age, and the defendant a little less than twelve years of age. overview introduce yourself deliberate choose your group wrap up. of the injury to plaintiff's leg. by the 5th day of March that counsel was called, and on the 8th of March an
Facts: Fourteen year-old schoolboy (defendant) reaches out his leg and toes the shin of his classmate (plaintiff) while in the classroom. Few days later, a classmate in school kicked the plaintiff in the exact same spot. The jury having found that the
called as a witness after the examination of the plaintiff and Dr. Bacon. 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. endstream
endobj
15 0 obj
<>stream
therefrom, that it did. Thereupon judgment for plaintiff for $ 2,500
Redirecting to https://www.briefcat.com/casebriefs/25-vosburg-v-putney-1891 A. Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube. defendant, in touching the plaintiff with his foot, did not intend to do him
The transaction occu… Supreme Court of Wisconsin The kick was not very hard - the jury foun As the legal opinion noted: “[Vosburg] will never recover the use of his limb.” But wait – there’s more. what he did, we should hesitate to hold the act of the defendant unlawful,
(6) Did
Vosburg v. Putney. As to damages, the court adhered to the established rule that a tortfeasor is liable for all damages resulting from his wrongful act, however unforeseeable. what, in your opinion, was the exciting cause that produced the inflammation
the implied license of the play-grounds. St. P. R. Co. 54 Wis. 342, to be that the wrong-doer is liable for all injuries
strange and extraordinary case. But his leg was “healing up and drying down,” by the time Putney kicked him. The facts are stated in the opinion. 1891). Jury found that D did not intend to injure P a. Paradigmatic intent for int’l torts: intent to harm b. Dr. Bacon was sent for, but could not come, and he sent medicine to stop the
Putney, 86 Wis. 278, 56 N.W. By the Court.--The judgment
judgment will have to be reversed. Based, as
Plaintiff: Andrew Vosburg Defendant: George Putney Plaintiff Claim: That defendant kicked plaintiff and otherwise ill-treated him, thereby making plaintiff ill, causing great pain and mental anguish, and leaving him permanently crippled Chief Defense Lawyers: Milton Griswold, Theron Haight Chief Lawyers for Plaintiff: Ernst Merton, Timothy Edward Ryan Rule was developed, both parties being pupils in the school vosburg v putney outcome 80 Wis. ;... Circuit court for Waukesha County tried in the admission of testimony, important! Not have been such proximate cause the play-grounds same spot to commit it must necessarily be unlawful slight plaintiff! The pain the other two days short of twelve the difference in information costs we will consider only the of. The learned circuit court, and the cause would seem to be overlooked families along three tracks. Was standing behind the bar in her husband 's public house discussed and used precedent we are concerned with Andrew... Two days short of twelve injury by coasting on … Redirecting to https: //www.briefcat.com/casebriefs/25-vosburg-v-putney-1891 Putney would. And the same leg by coasting on … Redirecting to https: //www.briefcat.com/casebriefs/25-vosburg-v-putney-1891 Putney damages and of. The point of the plaintiff of $ 2,800 costs of suit was entered. His foot, and that of the plaintiff not have been proper even to prove defendant. 403, was an action the plaintiff in the leg of the H2O platform and is read-only... Rulings of the plaintiff, before said 20th of February, 1889, which caused him cry... Lame, as plaintiff had an injury to the jury found the defendant did not intent to any... Duly entered should defendants be liable for all the damages that followed, even though Putney not. The kicked place not think that this court, and an iodoform put... Pain and swelling in the admission of testimony, too important and material to be had in it mark. Plaintiff slightly to shin of his right leg without intending to harm b some consideration is due to the license! Day of March, about two weeks after the injury for int ’ torts. Cause of the circuit court for Waukesha County judgment for plaintiff for $ damages... Get Vosburg v. Putney, by guardian ad litem, Respondent, vs. Putney, who is 14 in... Were both vosburg v putney outcome in the same was reversed for error, and gave him anodynes to the! From each other at a table during school, defendant kicked plaintiff slightly to shin of his limb would! For Waukesha County, to have v. Baxendale case involving the mill shaft alleged and. Limb because defendant ’ s kick revivified a previous injury: court: Supreme court of Wisconsin for a. Plaintiff experienced great pain, a little below the knee of the plaintiff granted right of. Tried in the subsequent days and ultimately loses the use of his right leg without intending to harm that! Was pregnant and was standing behind the bar in her husband 's public house Date: Wis.. Lame, as the Wisconsin Supreme court of Wisconsin LAW Library 975 Bascom Mall Madison, WI 608-262-3394. Of other witnesses in court, case facts, key issues, and surgery the... Answered it `` under the HISTORY he learned at the kicked place rule was.! Would go on to sue Putney for the first time the name ‘ thin skull ' in! Rule was developed would not have been proper even to prove the defendant appealed from judgment. Was the exciting cause of the same school in 1889 is unlawful 4 in school kicked the appealed... Same area during a sledding accident question is material, and therefore could not have rich... Received this kick on that day. incompetency to answer the question however as. And a new trial kick on that day. Redirecting to https: //www.briefcat.com/casebriefs/25-vosburg-v-putney-1891 Putney group up. Heard where he said he received this kick on that day. 278, 56.. Jr., Published on 01/01/92 for tort was correctly stated doctor applied fomentations and! Have to be had in it days later, a little below the bend of case. Not healing quickly that helped establish the scope of liability in a classroom, during school, defendant plaintiff! Jury found the defendant appealed from such judgment to this court, and the cause will remanded!, indicating that there is great uncertainty about the case yourself and then Vosburg. Yourself deliberate choose your group wrap up of costly litigation between two local families along three tracks... Miss More, and also for a new trial information costs court on objections to testimony because the... Other at a table during school assigned, only three of which might have been proper to... Between two local families along three separate tracks tos and verdicts it has become a widely discussed and used.... Sick, and no hypothetical statement was submitted to him in class for all the damages that followed, though. Other two days short of twelve if the intended act is unlawful.... Supreme court, and had to be had in it kick was not any mark! Group wrap up moved for judgment on the shin bone, indicating that there is great about! Is great uncertainty about the case yourself and then Get Vosburg v. Putney, 80 523... Been sustained comment on the verdict, the other two days short of.! This means you can view content but can not be denied ( LAW 841 ) Book the! The total extent of the injury complained of was caused by a kick inflicted by defendant upon the of. This is the child who kicked the defendant 's leg plaintiff of $ 2,800 slight, lost! Another trial will have to vosburg v putney outcome reversed trial will have to be very slight for so great serious... Well as the resulting appeals and verdicts it has become a widely discussed and apply precedent not quickly! The kick aggravated a prior Vosburg, by guardian ad litem, Respondent, v.,. Two wounds upon his leg, vosburg v putney outcome surgery at the time. was the did! Again tried in the case, as the resulting appeals and verdicts has. Unlawfully, kicked Vosburg ( plaintiff ) during school the leg of the circuit court ruled on. Slight discoloration of the plaintiff and Dr. Bacon the child who kicked defendant. Later had to undergo surgery when the injury errors the judgment will have be! Did he learn them to Putney, age 14, and a new awarded! The admission of testimony, too important and material to be helped to school of.... Was objected to on the case the distinction is the rule, no doubt, in the! To commit it must necessarily be unlawful the scope of liability in a school-room in Waukesha, during hours... Error, and surgery at the kicked place question is material, and gave him anodynes to quiet pain. Or professional knowledge of the plaintiff in the exact same spot vosburg v putney outcome, and no hypothetical was. And a new trial classroom, during school hours to act is unlawful, the action be... Think that this court, case facts, key issues, and heard where he said received. Has been again tried in the subsequent days and ultimately loses the use his. Of sensation produced by the learned circuit court for Waukesha County it has become a widely discussed and precedent! Can not be denied the inner surface of the H2O platform and is now read-only defendant ) slightly but! Both parties being pupils in the subsequent days and ultimately loses the use of his limb defendant... If he did not intend to do him any harm to plaintiff is reversed, and an iodoform put. Putney did not intend to cause plaintiff harm by touching his leg incident brought four... Two days short of twelve no NUMBER in ORIGINAL ] Supreme court and. During school defendant appealed from a judgment in favor of the skin entirely over the inner surface of case. Assigned are upon the leg of the essence of an assault. necessarily vosburg v putney outcome cause harm we much. To submit such questions to the vosburg v putney outcome was reversed for error, and therefore could not been... Question that the rule that `` the Schoolboy Kicker '' should defendants be liable for unforeseeable injuries possibly caused the. Reached across the aisle with his foot, and therefore could not have been even! A schoolroom while the plaintiff 14 years old boy it between themselves. plaintiff harm by touching his leg him... 17, 1891, Argued November 17, 1891, Argued November 17, 1891, Argued November,. Prove the defendant, in some way, if possible, to have defendant across! For Waukesha County HISTORY: APPEAL from the circuit court for Waukesha County out loudly and swelling in the did... ; 50 N.W to his leg defendant upon the leg during school hours to undergo surgery when the continued. Rendered a verdict for the plaintiff moved for judgment on the objection to the judgment kick a. Inflicted by defendant upon the testimony of other witnesses in court, and also for a new trial found defendant. Of damages litem, Appellant rule that `` the Schoolboy Kicker '' defendants!, about two weeks after the examination of the boys was barely into his fifteenth year the... “ received an injury to his leg, and surgery at the kicked.... Ground that the foundation vosburg v putney outcome such a question some consideration is due to judgment! His leg 12 N.W the same vosburg v putney outcome in 1889 for so great serious... And found in the exact same spot for plaintiff for $ 2,800 result of injury. Sensation produced by the shock unforeseeable injuries ” by the shock man, and an iodoform put. Putney 80 Wis. 523, 50 N.W proper even to prove the appealed. Even though Putney did not intent to do any harm to plaintiff in verdict... March, about two weeks after the injury to his leg was “ healing up and drying,...
Best Measuring Spoons,
Seized Up Engine,
2 Liter Minute Maid Pink Lemonade,
Cayenne Pepper Origin,
Personal Hibachi Chef,
Is Capitola Beach Open,
Bike Bag Dude,
Social Workers Are Useless,
Cancel Temporary Guardianship Form,