Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Hoffman
15 S.W. 1048, 1891 Tex. LEXIS 1014, 80 Tex. 420 (1891)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A parent's contributory negligence in failing to mitigate damages for an injured child will bar the parent's own claim for recovery, but such negligence cannot be imputed to the minor child to bar the child's separate claim for their injuries.
Facts:
- Kelly Hoffman, a 15-year-old boy, sustained a dislocated arm at the elbow while his father, August Hoffman, was away from home.
- At the direction of Kelly's mother, a telegram was sent to the family physician, Dr. Dutton, reading: "Come on first train; Kelly Hoffman broke his arm."
- The defendant telegraph company received the message but negligently failed to deliver it to Dr. Dutton.
- The Hoffman family made no further attempts to contact Dr. Dutton or secure any other medical assistance for the boy's injury.
- Nine days later, Dr. Dutton happened to pass the Hoffman residence and was called in to examine Kelly.
- By this time, the arm had healed improperly, leaving it stiff and permanently disabled. Dr. Dutton testified it was too late to reset it without great danger.
- Expert testimony was conflicting on whether the arm could have been successfully treated nine days after the initial injury.
Procedural Posture:
- August Hoffman, for himself and as next friend for his minor son Kelly Hoffman, sued the telegraph company in a trial court.
- The defendant pleaded the affirmative defense of contributory negligence.
- A jury trial was held, resulting in a verdict in favor of August Hoffman for $900 and in favor of Kelly Hoffman for $4125.
- The trial court entered a judgment based on the jury's verdict.
- The defendant's motion for a new trial was denied by the trial court.
- The defendant appealed the judgment to the present appellate court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a parent's contributory negligence in failing to seek alternative medical care for their injured minor child bar recovery for both the parent's own damages and the child's damages?
Opinions:
Majority - Henry, Associate Justice
No. A parent's contributory negligence bars the parent's right to recover, but it does not bar the minor child's separate right to recover for their injuries. The evidence clearly shows that the permanent nature of the injury was attributable to the parents' lack of proper care in failing to procure medical assistance after it became evident that Dr. Dutton would not respond to the initial message. This contributory negligence bars August Hoffman's claim for his own benefit. However, the negligence of the parents cannot be imputed to the minor child. A minor's recovery can only be precluded by their own contributory negligence. The standard for a minor's negligence is not that of an adult, but rather the degree of care reasonably expected from a child of their age, capacity, and situation. Given that Kelly was a 15-year-old suffering from a painful injury, it is doubtful he had the discretion or experience to appreciate the consequences of not receiving treatment or the ability to contract for medical services himself, thus he was not contributorily negligent.
Analysis:
This case establishes a crucial distinction in tort law between a parent's claim and a minor child's claim arising from the same incident. It solidifies the principle that parental negligence is not imputed to the child, thereby protecting the child's independent right to recovery. The decision prevents a negligent third party from escaping liability for injuries to a child by pointing to the subsequent negligence of the child's parents. This ruling also reinforces the subjective standard of care for minors, requiring juries to evaluate a minor's alleged contributory negligence based on their specific age and capacity, not an objective adult standard.
