Wilson v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp.
| Docket Number: | 2003-CA-00233-SCT Linked Case(s): 2003-CA-00233-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 07-29-2004 Opinion Author: Easley, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Contract - Emotional distress - Tortious breach of contract - Conversion - Breach of peace - Reduction of award - Punitive damages Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller and Cobb, P.JJ., Carlson, Dickinson and Randolph, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz and Graves, JJ. Procedural History: JNOV Nature of the Case: CIVIL - CONTRACT |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-20-2002 Appealed from: Claiborne County Circuit Court Judge: Lamar Pickard Disposition: The jury returned a verdict against GMAC and American Lenders, and the trial court reduced the verdict against GMAC to $75,000. Case Number: CV-99-0002 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Constrilla Washington Wilson |
GERALD PATRICK COLLIER |
||
| Appellee: | General Motors Acceptance Corporation and American Lenders Service Company of Jackson, Mississippi, Inc. | VICTOR A. DUBOSE DEREK ROYCE ARRINGTON JOE S. DEATON, III JOSEPH BLAIR LOBRANO |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Contract - Emotional distress - Tortious breach of contract - Conversion - Breach of peace - Reduction of award - Punitive damages |
| Summary of the Facts: | Constrilla Wilson filed suit against General Motors Acceptance Corporation alleging wrongful repossession, conversion and tortious breach of contract regarding a 1995 Ford Mustang which had been purchased by Wilson's husband, James Wilson, and financed by GMAC. Wilson was not a party to the purchase contract for the Ford Mustang with GMAC. GMAC removed the case to the U.S. District Court of Southern District of Mississippi. On Wilson's motion to remand, the judge remanded the case to circuit court based on Wilson providing an affidavit stating that she would not seek damages in excess of $75,000 in the lawsuit. Wilson filed a separate suit for wrongful repossession and conversion against American Lenders Service Company of Jackson, Mississippi, Inc., the repossession company used by GMAC. GMAC again removed the action to federal court, but the federal court remanded the case back to circuit court based on Wilson's acknowledgment in her affidavit that she did not seek in excess of $75,000 against GMAC. The trial court consolidated the cases against GMAC and American Lenders. The jury returned a verdict against GMAC finding it "guilty of breach of contract" and "guilty of conversion" and assessing compensatory damages against GMAC in the amount of $2,500,000. The jury returned a verdict against American Lenders finding it "guilty of breach of the peace" and assessing compensatory damages in the amount of $1,000,000. The court immediately reduced the verdict against GMAC to $75,000 consistent with Wilson's affidavit. Wilson filed a motion to alter or amend the final judgment which the court denied. The court granted American Lenders' and GMAC's motion for JNOV, and denied GMAC's motion for mistrial. The court set aside the $1,000,000 verdict against American Lenders and the $75,000 judgment against GMAC. Wilson appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Emotional distress Wilson's complaint for damages was based on a claim of emotional distress which consisted primarily of loss of sleep. Wilson neither sought nor received any medical treatment or professional counseling regarding her alleged emotional distress. A plaintiff may not recover emotional distress damages resulting from ordinary negligence without proving some sort of physical manifestation of injury or demonstrable physical harm. Recovery for mental anguish can be allowable when there is not physical injury, where the defendant's conduct is outrageous or evokes outrage or revulsion. In this case, none of GMAC's actions can be seen as extreme or outrageous. Therefore, Wilson's evidence was insufficient to support a claim for emotional distress against GMAC. Because of the lack of evidence of any extreme or outrageous conduct by American Lenders during the repossession, the evidence does not support Wilson's recovery under a claim of emotional distress against American Lenders. Issue 2: Tortious breach of contract Wilson alleged that GMAC committed a tortious breach of contract when it repossessed the Mustang. While the purpose in establishing a measure of damages for a breach of contract is to put the injured party in the position where she would have been but for the breach, an injured party cannot be placed in a better position than she would have been had the contract been performed. Wilson got a complete refund of the extension agreement payment which she accepted. Because Wilson was put back in the position she was originally in before any breach of contract, the court did not err in finding that recovery for breach of contract was not in order. Issue 3: Conversion Wilson argues that GMAC's actions violated its repossession policy and amounted to conversion of the Mustang. Ownership of the property is an essential element of a claim for conversion. The evidence shows that Wilson abandoned the Mustang. Furthermore, Wilson accepted and cashed the full refund of what she paid for the extension agreement, receiving back what she had paid to GMAC. Therefore, the court did not err in finding that Wilson was not entitled to recover any damages for conversion. Issue 4: Breach of peace Wilson argues that the court erred in granting American Lenders' motion for JNOV since the jury found American Lenders guilty of breach of peace. American Lenders did not use any surprise tactics to repossess the car. The repossession agent testified that when he arrived at Wilson's home, the Mustang was parked at Wilson's trailer, but Wilson was not at home. He chose not to repossess the Mustang until Wilson returned home. Wilson told him they could have the car, and he assisted Wilson in removing her personal belongings. Given the evidence, the court did not err in determining that no credible evidence existed to support the recovery awarded by the jury against American Lenders for breach of the peace. Issue 5: Reduction of award Wilson argues that the court erred in immediately reducing the jury award of $2,500,000 against GMAC by entering a final judgment for $75,000. Since the court did not err in granting GMAC's motion for JNOV to eliminate any award against GMAC, this issue is moot. Issue 6: Punitive damages Wilson argues that the court erred by not submitting punitive damages to the jury. Wilson made no request that a punitive damages phase be held nor did she mention punitive damages in her post-trial motion to alter or amend the judgment. Therefore, this issue is procedurally barred on appeal. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
