*1 181 1970] COOPER CHRISTENSEN Opinion of the Court — n Damages — — Independent Pay- Torts Tortfeasors Partial ment. by received tort two or more committed tortfeasors pro tanto, the amount of he is entitled to recover other tortfeasor or independent. whether tortfeasors Damages — — — Independent Torts Tortfeasors Assault — Battery Payment. Partial A money sum youths which three who battery committed an assault and him on defendant’s premises properly allowed the trial court to be con- reducing sidered plaintiff could receive from defendant. Damages Battery —Torts—Assault —Evidence—Verdict- Adequacy. grossly inadequate award of where uncontroverted plaintiff’s out-of-pocket $2,081.61, taking after into per- account an amount sons who had assaulted on defendant’s business premises, plaintiff’s pain suffering ignored. and where were Damages Evidence—Jury—Evaluation Testimony. — any testimony to evaluate free not testimony regard- full ing party’s damages. References for Points Jur, seq. 45 Am Release 36 et 2d, Damages [3] [4, Damages seq. 181 et op Opinion the Court Damages Special Damages Evidence—Verdict—Adequacy. special damages, un- a claim not, not bind a to render a verdict does controverted *2 special are not but are because sacred in that amount issue; are in and though jury award be even a affirmed therefore plaintiff’s special damages $2,081.61.
Appeal Wayne, George Martin, T. J. Sub- (Docket at Detroit. 11,1970, mitted Division June 8070.) No. Decided December 10, 1970. Complaint Larry Cooper against Aksel Chris- injury. personal tensen for for grounds inadequacy of the of the verdict. Reversed and remanded. Lopatin (Theodore Rosenberg,
Albert M. coun- plaintiff. sel), for Campbell Moesta, é
Johnson, for defendant. Before: and R. B. and Burns JJ. O’Hara,* R. B. was 1963, October Burns, group attacked at defendant’s drive-in youths. required Resulting injuries to his left ankle hospitalization surgery. plain- For six months nonwalking tiff wore a cast which was removed late March, employed by At the time of the attack Sampson-Hill Corporation. He never returned to work for had filed them. He application Company prior with the Ford Motor * Supreme Justice, Former sitting Appeals Court on the Court of by assignment pursuant 1963, 6, 8 to Const art as amended Opinion op the Coubt April and Ford him work on 1, called assault reported engaged immediately 1964. He heavy physical perform which he was able to labor, regularly med- on. Plaintiff received no then April ical treatment after Wayne County The medical records librarian Hospital medical General testified excluding fees, $1,139.25. treatment, doctors’ cost regarding fees submitted. No evidence doctors’ Sampson-Hill Cor- The chief accountant poration plaintiff was on sick leave during April 1963, 1964, until 3, from October 14, wages. which time lost regarding injury, hospital- Plaintiff testified wearing suffering, surgery, ization, nonwalking com- evidence of cast. There nowas disability. permanent plications counsel’s Over objection, plaintiff *3 to on cross-examination receipt from assailants. $1,037.94 the following gave jury in- the the : struction plaintiff charge you re- I the has “And also testimony, according of $1,037.94 the ceived a sum, to boys And assault. from the the three that committed you liable, find defendant
therefore, you the the must the sum deduct you damages has the find amount proven.” jury $675.
The awarded trial. He his motion for new the denial of jury allowing the erred the below any his assailants deduct the sum inadequate. grossly damages, award was that the The more two or tort committed pro tanto, the
tortfeasors of any recover entitled to is App J. O’Hara, and this other tortfeasor independ the tortfeasors is so whether ent. MCLA 600.2925 [2] (Stat Ann 1962 Rev (1944), 27A.2925[2]). Lara bell Schuknecht did not err trial court Thus, Mich 419. the damages by the to reduce jury allowing assailants. the youthful sum previously paid be testimony was uncontroverted Nevertheless, $2,- damages at jury establishing plaintiff’s fore the 081.61.1 out- uncontroverted ignores award face. on its inadequate
of-pocket 157; Whit 2 Mich Michlap (1966), Hugener 11 Mich App Poultry (1968), Co. Whiteley son v. and suf which ignores pain an award too, 598. So . v. Bender Fordon inadequate is also fering 363 Mich (1961), less than substantially in this case was award by plaintiff suffered established special suffering. consider
and failed to a new trial. Costs and remanded for Reversed to plaintiff. concurred. I to agree am unable (dissenting). colleagues.
with my jurisdic- law of this I never understood the have in full tion to be that a view my testimony. on trial. free to evaluate *4 thing. damages are or confessed Stipulated uncon- damage, claim of is there Nor bind a no, jury. does not troverted $1,980.30, minus wages $1,139.25, plus lost Hospital expenses mitigation of prior this action $1,037.94 paid defendants v. Toffolo Vandette sacred about so-called anything “special damages”. They if jury are in issue.
I would affirm the jury verdict. v. TOFFOLO
VANDETTE Jury 1. —Voir Dire —Discretion. enjoys broad voir discretion the control of dire. 2. Presumptions to Serve —Burden Venireman—Qualified Proof. presumed qualified party venireman is to be to serve and the challenging showing disquali- a venireman has burden of fication for cause. Jury Prejudice. 3. —Voir Dire —Court’s Examination — juror prospective usually The examination of a limited to the juror’s enjoys own statement and the broad dis- investigation prej- cretion the nature of the udice. Jury 'Appeal 4. —Venireman—Court’s Examination — and Error. assigned Error can be to the failure of the trial court to conduct investigation juror prospective proper a sufficient in the proper showing. circumstances and Jury Venireman—Prejudice—Evidentiary Hearing. evidentiary hearing An was ordered to be held to hear offer proofs which, established, challenge would sustain References1 Points [i: 2d, Jury 47 Am Jur 2d, Jury [2. [3; 2d, Jury 2d, 47 Am Jur 47 § § [4; Jury Am47 Jur