(Download) "Ramsbacher v. Hohman" by Supreme Court of Montana # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Ramsbacher v. Hohman
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 10, 1927
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 61 KB
Description
Conversion ? Exemplary Damages ? When Proper ? "Malice" ? Appeal from Judgment ? Absence of Motion for New Trial ? Extent of Review of Evidence ? Costs on Appeal. Appeal from Judgment ? Absence of Motion for New Trial ? Extent of Review of Evidence. 1. On appeal from the judgment, where no motion for a new trial was made, appellant contending that the evidence is insufficient to support the award of damages, the review of the evidence by the supreme court is limited to an examination of the record, to determine whether there is any substantial evidence to justify the verdict. Conversion ? Excessive Verdict ? When not Due to Passion or Prejudice of Jury. 2. In an action for the conversion of a Ford car, error of the jury in making an overallowance of $108.48 as actual damages held, not to show passion or prejudice on their part, the evidence on the question of value having been uncertain and open to speculation. Same ? Exemplary Damages ? Malice may be Proved, How. 3. Malice, as a basis for exemplary damages, may be proved by direct evidence of evil motive and intent on the part of the defendant or by legitimate inferences to be drawn from other facts and circumstances in evidence. Same ? Malice ? Meaning of Term. 4. The term "malice," as applied to torts, does not necessarily mean that which must proceed from a spiteful, malignant or revengeful disposition; if the party against whom exemplary damages are sought acted in an unjustifiable manner and actually caused the injury complained of, malice in law will be implied from his conduct. Same ? When Award of Exemplary Damages Warranted. 5. Where the jury in an action in conversion found in favor of plaintiffs contention that defendant chattel mortgagee in violation of his agreement extending the time within which plaintiff could pay his debt caused an officer to seize the chattel, thus acting maliciously and oppressively, an award of exemplary damages was justified. Same ? Exemplary Damages in Discretion of Jury ? When Award not Disturbed on Appeal. 6. The amount which the jury may award as exemplary damages is largely in their discretion; their award will not be disturbed - Page 481 as excessive, unless the amount, considered in connection with the facts, is indicative of passion, prejudice or corruption on the part of the jury. Same ? Exemplary Damages ? What Jury may Take into Consideration. 7. In determining whether plaintiff shall be awarded exemplary damages the jury should take into consideration the attendant circumstances, such as the malice or wantonness of the act complained of, the injury intended, the motive for the act, the manner in which it was committed and the deterrent effect upon others; they may also consider defendants pecuniary ability; the amount in any event must be reasonable. Appeal ? Failure of Appellant to Move Correction of Apparent Error in Trial Court ? Effect on Right to Recover Costs on Appeal. 8. Where appellant made no effort in the trial court to have an apparent error in an award of damages corrected on motion for a new trial on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdict, and the judgment is modified on appeal to the extent of such erroneous award, the respondent will be awarded his costs on appeal notwithstanding such modification.