had been suffering. Whether a coronary thrombosis took place after the motor vehicle accident and to what extent, if any, such a development may have been causally related to the defendant's negligence are questions which are answerable, if at all, in the realm of possibility as distinguished from probability. Therefore, in view of the burden of proof which is cast upon the plaintiff in this case with respect to his claims for injuries, I cannot say that the accident probably induced a further coronary thrombosis. While I am persuaded that there was probably an aggravation of the plaintiff's underlying heart disease in consequence of his emotional reaction to the motor vehicle collision, I am equally persuaded that his over-all disability has not been increased as a proximate result of the accident to any specific degree over that which existed by reason of his condition prior to the occurrence, and would probably have developed without the intervention thereof. However feeble the plaintiff may have been by reason of the preexisting condition of disease, the defendant would be chargeable with damages proportionate to the degree, if any, to which plaintiff's prior disability was temporarily or permanently aggravated as the proximate result of defendant's negligence.
The question of plaintiff's right to damages for the consequences of the collision to his automobile is not before me. I find that Dr. Leff's professional services to the plaintiff were appropriate to the condition from which he was suffering following the accident. The doctor's bill of $ 300 therefor is, in my opinion, reasonable. A further charge of $ 35.00 for electrocardiographic examination and an item of $ 171.85 for prescribed medication are reasonable charges and should be allowed to the plaintiff as part of his damages. For such physical and emotional traumata and the degree of disability consequential thereto which the plaintiff sustained as a proximate result of the negligence of the defendant alleged in the complaint, and including the special damages for medical and medication expense, I award to the plaintiff the sum of $ 3.500.00.
This opinion shall constitute my findings of fact and conclusions of law and an order may be presented for judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the amount of the damages aforesaid, but without costs, in this action.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.