Money that is awarded by a judge is generally called damages and reflects the result of the injury or loss caused by one party or another. There are several types of damages, which may overlap in their reward. (i) compensatory or actual damages covers the amount of the actual injury or economic loss, intended to place the injured party in the position the party was in prior to the injury. Typically includes lost wages, replacement of damages/lost property, medical expenses. (ii) General damages provides a monetary award for injuries which cannot be calculated to exact amounts such as pain and suffering, shortened life expectancy, loss of consortium (companionship), injury due to libel and slander such as the harmful effects on the plaintiff’s reputation. (iii) Nominal damages Minimal damages, usually a token amount provided to a prevailing party, usually because the law requires some compensation although damage to the plaintiff was minimal (libel damages which may have been read by one person who didn’t share the information and thus damage caused to the plaintiff is minimal.) (iv) Special damages compensates the prevailing party for their costs paid from their own pocket, for example, the victim of a car accident may obtain medical expenses, costs of auto repair costs, rental car fees due to the care being unavailable and lost wages for being out of work. (v) Punitive or exemplary damages additional damages awarded beyond special and general damages to punish a losing party that exhibited willful, malicious misconduct. (iv) Statutory damages money awards that are required or authorized by law, for example, a judge may be able to award double or treble damages with security deposit abuse by a landlord.
Law Dictionary – Alternative Legal Definition
A pecuniary compensation or indemnity, which may be recovered in the courts by apy person who has suffered loss, detriment, or injury, whether to his person, property, or rights, through the unlawful act or omission or negligence of another. Scott v. Donald, 165 U. S. 58, 17 Sup. Ct 265, 41 L. Ed. 632; Crane v. Peer, 43 N. J. Eq. 553, 4 Atl. 72; Cincinnati v. Hafer, 49 Ohio St 60, 30 N. E. 197; Wainscott v. Loan Ass’n, 98 Cal. 253, 33 Pac. 88; Carvill v. Jacks, 43 Ark. 449; Collins v. Railroad Co., 9 Heisk. (Tenn.) 850; New York v. Lord, 17 Wend. (N. Y.) 293; O’Connor v. Dils, 43 W. Va. 54, 26 S. E. 354.
A sum of money assessed by a jury, oh finding for the plaintiff or successful party In an action, as a compensation for the injury done him by the opposite party. 2 Bl. Comm. 438; Co. Litt 257a; 2 Tidd, Pr. 869, 870.
Every person who suffers detriment from the unlawful act or omission of another may recover from the person in fault a compensation therefor in money, which is called “damages.” Civ. Code Cal. { 3281; Civ. Code Dak. { 1940.
In the ancient usage, the word “damages” was employed in two significations. According to Coke, its proper and general sense included the coats of suit, while its strict or relative sense was exclusive of costs. 10 Coke, 116, 117; Co. Litt. 257a; 9 East, 299. The latter meaning has alone survived.
Classification. Damages are either general or special. General damages are such as the law itself implies or presumes to have accrued from the wrong complained of, for the reason that they are its immediate, direct, and proximate result, or such as necessarily result from the injury, or such as did in fact result from the wrong, directly and proximately, and without reference to the special character, condition, or circumstances of the plaintiff. Mood v. Telegraph Co., 40 S. C. 52? 19 S. E. 67; Manufacturing Co. v. Gridley, 28 Conn. 212: Irrigation Co. v. Canal Co., 23 Utah, 199, 63 Pac. 812; Smith v. Railway Co., 30 Minn. 169, 14 N. W. 797; Loftus v. Bennett 68 App. Div. 128, 74 N. Y. Supp. 290. Special damages are those which are the actual, but not the necessary, result of the injury complained of, and which in fact follow it as a natural and proximate consequence in the particular case, that is a reason of special circumstances or conditions. Hence general damages are such as might accrue to any person similarly injured, while special damages are such as did in fact accrue to the particular individual by reason of the particular circumstances of the case. Wallace v. Ah Sam, 71 Cal. 197, 12 Pac. 46. 60 Am. Rep. 534; Manufacturing Co. v. Gridley, 28 Conn. 212; Lawrence v. Porter, 63 Fed. 62, 11 C. C. A. 27, 26 L. R. A. 167; Roberts v. Graham. 6 Wall. 579.18 U Ed. 791; Fry v. McCord, 95 Tenn. 678, 33 S. W. 568.
Direct and consequential. Direct damages are such as follow immediately upon the act done; while consequential damages are the necessary and connected effect of the wrongful act, flowing from some of its consequences or results, though to some extent depending on other circumstances. Civ. Code Ga. 1895, f 3911; Pearson v. Spartanburg County, 51 S. C. 480,’ 29 S. E. 193; Eaton v. Railroad Co., 51 N. H. 504, 12 Am. Rep. 147.
Liquidated and unliquidated. The former term is applicable when the amount of the damages has been ascertained by the judgment in the action, or when a specific sum of money has been expressly stipulated by the parties to a bond or other contract as the amount of damages to be recovered by either party for a breach of the agreement by the other. Watts v. Sheppard, 2 Ala. 445; Smith v. Smith, 4 Wend. (N. x.) 470; Keeble v. Keeble, 85 Ala. 552. 5 South. 149; Eakin v. Scott, 70 Tex. 442, 7 S. W. 777. Unliquidated damages are such as are not yet reduced to a certainty in reepect of amount, nothing more being established than the plaintiff’s right to recover; or such as cannot be fixed by a mere mathematical calculation from ascertained data in the case. Cox v. McLaughlin, 76 Cal. 60, 18 Pac. 100, 9 Am. St. Rep. 164.
Nominal and substantial. Nominal damages are a trifling sum awarded to a plaintiff in an action, where there is no substantial loss or injury, to be compensated, but still the law recognizes a technical invasion of his rights or a breach of the defendant’s duty, or in cases where, although there has been a real injury, the plaintiffs evidence entirely fails to show its amount. Maher v. Wilson, 139 Cal. 514. 73 Pac. 418; Stanton v. Railroad Co.. 59 Conn. 272, 22 Atl. 300, 21 Am. St. Rep. 110: Springer v. Fuel Co.. 196 Pa. 156, 46 Atl. 370; Telegraph Co. v. Lawson. 66 Kan. 660, 72 Pac. 283; Railroad Co. v. Watson, 37 Kan. 773, 15 Pac 877. Substantial damages are considerable in amount, and intended as a real compensation for a real injury.
Compensatory and exemplary. Compensatory damages are such as will compensate the injured party for the injury sustained, and nothing more; such as will simply make good or replace the loss caused by the wrong or injury. McKnight v. Denny, 198 Pa. 323, 47 Atl. 970; Reid v. Terwillier. 116 N. Y. 530. 22 N. E. 1091; Monongahela Nav. Co. v. U. S., 148 U. S. 312, 13 Sup. Ct. 622. 37 L. Ed. 463; Wade v. Power Co.. 51 S. C. 296, 29 S. E. 233. 64 Am. St Rep. 676; Gatzow v. Buening, 106 Wis. 1, 81 N. W. 1003, 49 L. R. A. 475, 80 Am. St. Rep. 1. Exemplary damages are damages on an increased scale, awarded to the plaintiff over and above what will barely compensate him for his property loss, where the wrong done to him was aggravated by circumstances of violence, oppression, malice, fraud, or wanton and wicked conduct on the part of the defendant and are intended to solace the plaintiff for mental anguish, laceration of his feelings, shame, degradation, or other aggravations of the original wrong, or else to punish the defendant for hia evil behavior or to make an example of him. for which reason they are also called “punitive” or “punitory” damages or “vindictive” damages, and (vulgarly) “smart-money.” Reid
T. Terwilliger, 116 N. Y. 530, 22 N. E. 1091; Springer v. Fuel Co., 196 Pa. St. 156, 46 At 370: Scott v. Donald, 165 U. S. 58, 17 Sup. Ct. 265, 41 L. Ed. 632; Gillingham v. Railroad Co., 35 W. Va. 588, 14 S. E. 243, 14 L. R. A. 798, 29 Am. St. Rep. 827; Boydan v. Haberstumpf, 129 Mich. 137, 88 N. W. 386: Oliver Railroad Co., 65 S. C. 1, 43 S. E. 307; Murphy v. Hobbe, 7 Colo. 541, 5 Pac. 119, 49 Am. Repw 366.
Proximate and remote. Proximate damages are the immediate and direct damages and natural results of the act complained of, and auch as are usual and might have been expected. Remote damages are those attributable immediately to an intervening cause, though it forms a link in an unbroken chain of causation, so that the remote damage would not have occurred if its elements had not been set in motion by the original act or event Henry v. Railroad Co., 50 Cal. 183; Kuhn v. Jewett, 32 N. J. Ed. 649; Pielke v. Railroad Co., 5 Dak. 444, 41 N. W. 669. The terms “remote damages” and “consequential damages” are not synonymous nor to De used interchangeably; all remote damage is consequential, but it is by no means true that all consequential damage is remote. Eaton v. Railroad Co., 51 N. H. 511, 12 Am. Rep. 147.
Other compound and descriptive terms. Actual damages are real, substantial and just damages, or the amount awarded to a complainant in compensation for his actual and real loss or injury, as opposed on the one hand to “nominal” damages, and on the other to “exemplary” or “punitive damages. Ross v. Legsett, 61 Mich. 445, 28 N. W. 695, 1 Am. St Rep. 60S: Lord v. Wood, 120 Iowa, 303, 94 N. W. 842; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Lawson, 66 Kan. 660, 72 Pac. 283; Field v. Munster, 11 Tex. Civ. App. 341, 32 S. W. 417; Oliver v. Columbia, etc., R. Co.. 65 & C. 1, 43 S. E. 807; Gatcow v. Buening, 106 Wis. 1, 81 N. W. 1003, 49 L. R. A. 475, 80 Am. St Rep. 1; Osborn v. Leach, 135 N. C. 628. 47 S. E. 811, 66 L. R. A. 648: Gen. St. Minn. 1894,