Title: CITY OF LAWTON v. JOHNSTONE
Citation: 123 Okla. 145, 1926 OK 563, 252 P. 39 3
Docket Number: 
State: Oklahoma
Issuer: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Date: June 22, 1926

CITY OF LAWTON v. JOHNSTONE Annotate this Case CITY OF LAWTON v. JOHNSTONE 1926 OK 563 252 P. 393 123 Okla. 145 Case Number: 16681 Decided: 06/22/1926 Supreme Court of Oklahoma CITY OF LAWTON v. JOHNSTONE. Syllabus ¶0 1. Municipal Corporations--Negligent Operation of Sewage Disposal Plant-Nonliability to Landowner for Punitive Damages. The evidence in this record does not disclose that the negligence charged by plaintiff resulted from that degree of malice, fraud, or oppression which would authorize the recovery of punitive damages against the municipality. 2. Same--Judgment Reversed. Record examined; held to be insufficient to support judgment against the municipality for punitive damages. Owen Black and Chas. C. Black, for plaintiff in error. Parmenter & Parmenter, for defendant in error. STEPHENSON, C. ¶1 The defendant in error commenced her action against the city of Lawton for actual and punitive damages resulting from the operation of a sewerage disposal plant by the defendant. The trial of the cause resulted in judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $ 500 actual damages and $ 1,292 punitive damages. The defendant has appealed the cause for review, and attacks the sufficiency of the record to support the judgment for punitive damages. The defendant in error submits he propositions: That the municipality did not except to the instruction in relation to punitive damages in the way and manner provided by law, and that a sufficient assignment of the error was not made in the motion for new trial. The jury returned separate verdicts for the different elements of damage. The motion for new trial assigned errors in that the verdict was not supported by sufficient evidence and was contrary to the law. The assignments in the petition in error and brief go more particularly to the question.