Stoleson v. United States
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
708 F.2d 1217 (1983)
- Written by Serena Lipski, JD
Facts
Helen Stoleson (plaintiff) worked for a federal munitions plant, where she regularly handled nitroglycerin. Regular exposure to nitroglycerin caused Stoleson to have heart disease. In February 1968, Stoleson was diagnosed with having a possible heart attack. In 1971 Stoleson saw Dr. Lange, who determined the nitroglycerin exposure caused her disease and told her she had serious, permanent heart damage. Stoleson left the munitions plant in 1971, and her heart disease eventually resolved with no lasting effect. Stoleson filed suit against the federal government under the Federal Tort Claims Act. In 1975 the first trial was held. A second trial was held in the early 1980s on the issue of damages, with Stoleson seeking damages for the heart disease as well as hypochondria symptoms, including dizziness, chest pains, and other symptoms that made her unable to work. Hypochondria was not mentioned in the first trial. Dr. Goldbloom, a psychiatrist, evaluated Stoleson in 1980, and he testified at trial that Stoleson had hypochondria that had been induced by her possible heart attack in 1968. Dr. Goldbloom also testified that the hypochondria’s onset was triggered by Dr. Lange’s diagnosis in 1971. Dr. Roberts, the government’s psychiatrist, examined Stoleson in 1981, and he testified that Stoleson had been a hypochondriac her whole life. One psychiatrist testified that hypochondria is difficult to diagnose because so little is known about it. The judge found that the government’s negligence caused Stoleson’s heart disease and awarded her $53,000 in damages. The judge did not award damages for her hypochondria symptoms, holding that Stoleson had not proved causation or that her symptoms had occurred before the first trial in 1975, but he found that if she had proven causation, her damages would be $238,000. Stoleson appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Posner, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.