Vann v. Tyler
Vann v. Tyler
Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
This was an action in claim and delivery for two mules alleged to have been unlawfully and wrongfully taken by the defendants from the plaintiffs, and for damages for talc *379 ing and detention. After issue joined the case was tried before his Honor, Judge Prince, and a jury, at the April term of Court, 1916, for Aiken county, and resulted in a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs for the return of the mules or the value thereof, ,$350, and $300 actual damages, and $200 punitive damages.
After entry of judgment defendants appeal, and by 11 exceptions question the correctness of his Honor’s rulings and complain of error. At the hearing the appellants’ counsel stated that the exceptions raise only the question as to the $300 actual damages. The appellant conceded that the recovery of the mules and punitive damages are settled by the verdict of the jury, and must stand. • The contention of the appellants is that there is no allegation in the complaint of actual damages, and no allegation of special damages, and that his Honor was in error in admitting in evidence over objection the evidence to make out a case of actual damages—that there was no competent evidence of actual damages.
If the result of the wrong done is unusual and extraordinary under the circumstances, but if it flowed from the act wrongfully done, then upon sufficient allegation first and proof afterward if it flowed proximately from the wrongful act done the party injured could recover, although the wrongdoer could not have anticipated the particular result that followed. Here the result would be not the natural and necessary sequence of the act done, but something that did not of necessity follow. Under this state of facts it would be necessary to allege and prove special damages. But in the case at bar no such objection was made before the Circuit Court on the ground urged here.
We see no merits in the exceptions. It is held in Levi v. Legg & Bell, 23 S. C. 282, that the jury can find actual dam *381 ages without allegation or proof. All exceptions are overruled.
Judgment affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Vann Et Al. v. Tyler Et Al.
- Cited By
- 2 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 1. Damages—-Pleading—General Damages.—As general damages both naturally and necessarily flow from the wrongful act, the party whose rights are invaded need not allege general damages, but is entitled to recover such damages as follow- the natural, necessary, and proximate result of the act of wrongful invasion which fixes Ms right of action. 2. Damages—Pleading—Special Damages.—As special damages naturally but not necessarily flow from the act of wrongful invasion, although they are recoverable, although the wrongdoer could not have anticipated the particular result, it is necessary to allege and prove special damages. 3. Appeal and Error—Exceptions and Objections—Necessity.—In an action of claim and delivery, where no exceptions were reserved or proper objections made to the admission of evidence of special damages, on the ground that special damages were not alleged, as the trial Court did not have an opportunity to rule on the question, it cannot be considered on appeal.