Opinion ID: 1677390
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Punitive Damages-Mental Anguish Issue

Text: Boros argues that the trial court erred in granting the defendants' motion in limine regarding punitive damages and damages for mental anguish arising from the defendants' alleged legal malpractice. The defendants argue that Boros failed to preserve the error alleged in this regard. Because we conclude that the motion in limine here was of the prohibitive-absolute type, we disagree. [3] However, the defendants argue that any discussion of damages for mental anguish was properly disallowed because Boros alleged only professional negligence and breach of contract in his complaint. Also, the defendants argue that the facts of this case do not support any claim for punitive damages, and, therefore, that the trial court correctly excluded any discussion of punitive damages. We agree with the following statement by the Court of Civil Appeals: There can be no recovery for emotional distress, where [the legal malpractice] does not involve any affirmative wrongdoing but merely neglect of duty, and the client may not recover for mental anguish where the contract which was breached, was not predominately personal in nature. Dorsey v. Purvis, 543 So.2d 703, 704 (Ala. Civ.App.1989) (quoting 7A C.J.S. Attorney and Client § 273 (1980)). Here, Boros presented no evidence that the alleged malpractice involved affirmative wrongdoing and no evidence that his contract with the defendants was predominately personal in nature. Further, we agree with the defendants that the facts of this case did not warrant any mention of punitive damages. Ordinarily, punitive damages are not recoverable for breach of contract. Corson v. Universal Door Systems, Inc., 596 So.2d 565, 572 (Ala.1991). Also, some showing of fraudulent, malicious, willful, wanton, or reckless behavior or inaction must be made to support a claim for punitive damages in a legal malpractice case. Allowance of Punitive Damages in Actions Against Attorney for Malpractice, 13 A.L.R.4th 95 (1982 & Supp. 1992).