 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Whaley v. Perkins7/21/2005
property, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of implied warranties of habitability and marketability. Id. at 137. This Court stated that the three-year statute of limitations governed all of the causes of action, because the gravamen of the complaint was injury to property. However, the Prescott case differs in a crucial respect from the case before us now. In Prescott, all of the causes of action sought recovery for injury to property-there was no cause of action that even arguably could be considered an injury to the person. In the instant case, the cause of action for emotional distress differs from the causes of action for injury to property, in seeking recovery for what is, without question, an "injury to the person." For this reason, we conclude that the trial court erred in permitting the Whaleys to proceed with their claim against the Appellants for emotional distress; the complaint was time- barred since they filed suit well after the one-year statute of limitations for emotional distress had elapsed.
4. Did the trial court commit reversible error when its instructions to the jury on the issues of emotional distress and measure of damages were incorrect and confusing?
Appellants assert that the trial court's jury instructions on emotional distress and the measure of damages were incorrect and confusing. Our review of the trial transcript reveals that the jury instructions were indeed somewhat confusing.
Since the emotional distress claim for damages was erroneously allowed, the inclusion of instructions concerning emotional distress was improper. In that regard, the court instructed the jury as follows:
You've heard reference to the term emotional distress. Emotional distress is mental distress, mental suffering, or mental anguish. It includes all highly unpleasant mental reactions such as fright, horror, grief, shame, humiliation, embarrassment, anger, chagrin, disappointment and worry.
*
If you decide that a party's entitled to damages you must fix an amount that will reasonably compensate that party for each of the following elements: Of claim loss or harm if you find that it was suffered by that party and was caused by the conduct upon which you base your finding of fault . Each of these elements of damages is separate. You may not duplicate these damages for elements by also including that same for harm in another element of damage .
Reasonable compensation for such emotional injuries suffered by the plaintiffs and legally caused by the defendants' conduct is one element of damages in this case. A serious emotional injury occurred one a reasonable person normally constituted would be unable to adequately cope with the mental stress caused and brought about by the circumstances of the case.
There is no mathematical for computing reasonable compensation for negligent infliction of serious emotional injury, nor is the opinion of any witness required as to the amount of such compensation. And in making award of such damages you must use your best judgment and establish an amount of damages that is fair and reasonable in light of the evidence before you.
The trial court also gave the following instructions pertaining to the measure of damages for damage to property, which closely correspond to 8 Tennessee Pattern Jury Instructions-Civil 14.45 (T.P.I. 14.45):
The measure of damages to real property is the lesser of the following amounts: The reasonable cost of repairing the damage to the property, or the difference between the fair market value of the property immediately prior to and immediately after the damage. That allegation or that charge relates to the P
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|