Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

71 Ill. 85

Scott v. Hamilton

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1873

Illinois Supreme Court · decided 1873-09-15

John G. Rogers, Judge, presiding. This was an action of trespass, by James Hamilton against John W. Scott and Daniel Leonard, for an assault and battery alleged to have been committed by the defendants upon the person of the plaintiff. Scott, alone, appealed from the judgment.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 1905

1 state decisions

Relies on Walker v. Martin

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1873-09-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Mr. Chief Justice Breese

¶1delivered the opinion of the Court:

¶2This is an appeal from a judgment of the circuit court of Cook county, in an action of trespass assault and battery.

¶3Ho question of law is raised upon this record. The parties were sworn, and were the only witnesses to establish the trespass. It is not unusual, in such cases, there should be conflict in the testimony, which the jury reconciled the best way they could, in favor of the plaintiff, and we can not say they erred in so doing.

¶4The court overruled a motion for a new trial, after requiring the plaintiff to enter a remittitur of one thousand dollars. That court had the witnesses in their presence, and observed their manner of testifying, and took note of all the circumstances, and was satisfied the plaintiff was entitled to the verdict.

¶5It is complained the damages are excessive. We do not think so. They are large, so far as real physical injury was done, but that is not the only consideration in cases of this nature, as was said in Walker et al. v. Martin, 43 Ill. 508. In this kind of torts it is impossible to estimate precisely the measure of damages which would repair the injury. To a great extent it is a matter of sentiment and feeling, under the guidance of sound judgment, duly weighing all the circumstances of the case.

¶6. The jury had a right to award punitive damages in addition to such as may be considered cornpensatory merely. There was no justification for the beating, and it seems to have been quite a severe one. We can not say twelve hundred and fifty dollars exceeds rational bounds, and must affirm the judgment.

¶7Judgment affirmed.

/71/ill/85 · .json · Public domain