Emma Hutchison, Administratrix of the Estate of Nathaneal Patrick Hutchison, Deceased v. Pacific-Atlantic Steamship Co., a Corporation

Good Law
217 F.2d 384·1955 A.M.C. 1·1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 4173
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 8, 195413852California1,573 words

Opinion

Opinion

Orr, J.

‘ Appellant, alleging twp causes of action, the first seeking recovery for the pain and' suffering alleged to have been endured by her deceased husband; the second for pecuniary loss to appellant for the alleged wrongful death of deceased, brought an action in the district court under the provisions of the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C.A.'§'688.

The trial was had before á jury. At the conclusion of the submission of the .evidence the trial court instructed -the jury to return a verdict in'favor of the appellee on the first cause of action. The trial court was of the opinion that appellant had produced no substantial evidence of conscious pain and suffering on the part of the deceased. The jury returned a verdict in favor of appellee on the second cause of action.

Three specifications of error are set forth:

1. Misconduct of appellee’s counsel;

2. Improper instructions to the jury;

3. . Error in instructing the jury to .return a verdict in favor of appellee on the first cause of action.

We consider the specifications of error in inverse order. ■ ... ■

First, was there sufficient substantial evidence as to pain and suffering to require the submission of the question to the jury? In…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.