Smith v. Bagwell

Citations

• 19 Fla. 117

Syllabus

<p>1. It will not do to eliminate from the charge of the court to a jury a sentence connected with a paragraph upon the same question and except to that particular sentence the whole paragraph must be taken together and stand or fall by itself.</p> <p>2. The court charged the jury that “ words from one person to another will not justify an assault and battery Meld sufficient, that it was not incumbent upon the court to use the word “ merely ” or “only” after “words” in the charge to make its language intelligible to the jury ; that the use of either of these words would not have strengthened or modified the charge, or given any new or other light to the jury.</p> <p>3. Compensatory damages are defined as such as arise from actual and indirect pecuniary loss, mental suffering, value of time, actual expenses and bodily pain and suffering. Exemplary, vindictive or punitory damages are such as blend together the interests of society and of the aggrieved individual, and are not only a recompense to the sufferer but also a punishment to the offender and an example to the community.</p> <p>4. An award of punitive or exemplary damages in an action for a wi’ong, also punishable as a criminal offence, is not in violatioxx of that portion-of the eighth provision of the Deelax'ation of Bights, which px-ovides that “nopersoxx shall be sxxbject to be twice put in jeopardy for the same offeixee.”</p> <p>S. In actions of trespass for assault and hattery a jury may inflict what are called exemplary, punitive or vindictive damages upon a defendant, having in view the enormity of his offence as well as a measure of compensation to the plaintiff.</p>