Skip to main content
· 1/23/1902

Connelly v. Western Union Telegraph Co.

Citations

  • 100 Va. 51
  • 56 L.R.A. 663
  • 40 S.E. 618
  • 1902 Va. LEXIS 1

Syllabus

<p>1. Damages&emdash;Mental Anguish&emdash;Telegraph Companies.&emdash;Damages for men-tal suffering, independent of any injury to person or estate cannot be recovered against a telegraph company for negligent failure to deliver a message as promptly as possible, although the company is advised of the character of the message. The injuries in such cases are too hard to determine with any reasonable certainty, are more often assumed than real, and the suit is too liable to be wholly speculative. Damages such as are recoverable at common law must not only be the proximate result of the act complained of, but they must be certain and definite, and not speculative in their character.</p> <p>2. Damages&emdash;Code, See. 2900&emdash;Violation of Statute&emdash;Code, See. 1292.&emdash;The purpose of Sec. 2900 of the Code in allowing damages to any person injured by the violation of any statute was merely to preserve to the person injured the right to maintain his action for the injury he may have sustained by reason of the wrong-doing of another, and to prevent the wrong-doer from setting up the defence that he had paid the penalty of his wrong-doing under a penal statute. It was not intended to .create a new ground for bringing an action for damages, and will not support an action for mental anguish only, although the defendant may have violated the provisions of Sec. 1292 by failing to deliver promptly a telegram.</p> <p>3. Telegraph Companies&emdash;Special Damages Under Act March 2, 1900&emdash;. Mental Anguish.&emdash;The Act of March 2, 1900 (Acts 1899-1900, p. 724), subjecting telegraph companies to special damages occasioned by the negligent failure of their agents to deliver dispatches, and aD lowing the jury, in the determination of the quantum of damages to consider the grief and mental anguish occasioned to the plain-tiff by such negligent failure, does not give any new .cause of action for damages. To justify a recovery under this statute, the plaintiff must s

Judges: Cardwell

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.