D was insurance company for Veith. Veith was driving her car on the wrong side of the highway when she collided with and injured P.
Evidence showed that Veith saw a light on the back of a car and thought God was directing her car. She followed it.
Veith saw P's car and thought that she could fly if she ran into it faster (like Batman!). Testimony was offered that she suffered a schizophrenic reaction.
P sued D for damages in negligence.
Procedural History:
Trial court found for P.
WI Supreme Court affirmed, found for P.
Issues:
Is insanity a defense to negligent conduct in all situations?
Holding/Rule:
Insanity is only a defense to the reasonable person standard in negligence if the D had no warning and knowledge of her insanity.
Reasoning:
Veith suffered an insane delusion at the time of the accident.
The effect of the illness must be such as to affect the person's ability to understand and appreciate the duty of ordinary care.
Also, there must be an absence of notice or forewarning that the person may suddenly be subject to such insanity.
Veith, however, had prior warning that would reasonably lead her to believe that she would have hallucinations.
Thus, she should be held to the ordinary standard of care. The jury could conclude that she could foresee this because of testimony about her religious beliefs.
Dissent:
None.
Notes:
The mental disease must be sudden like a heart attack or sudden seizure.
