Hoffman v. Stamper

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “punitive damages may not be awarded” under CPA
• requiring that a plaintiff identify some “compensable injury as a result of the misrepresentation
• indicating that a plaintiff’s testimony that “whenever he began thinking about his problems, he would get headaches and would vomit,” could be sufficient to show an objectively ascertainable consequential physical injury supporting recovery for emotional distress
• distinguishing “actual knowledge,” including a “wilful refusal to know,” from the lesser standard of “reckless indifference to the truth”
• establishing, several years after E.F. Hutton, that willful blindness suffices as actual knowledge to fraudulent activity
• striking $145,000 compensatory damages award where plaintiff did not present evidence of any physical manifestation of emotional stress

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).