Opinion ID: 1680227
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Was the jury verdict of $25,000 in actual damages and $50,000 in punitive damages against the overwhelming weight of the evidence?

Text: The evidence for appellees on actual damages indicated that, as a result of the incident, she felt ashamed and was humiliated by the criminal accusations, she had nightmares and difficulty sleeping afterwards, and had to move in with her sister, that she was required to see a doctor who prescribed Librium for her, and that she was embarrassed to seek employment because she would have to disclose that she had been arrested previously. The proof on the issue of punitive damages was to the effect that Gaylord's had eighteen (18) or twenty (20) other stores. There was no evidence relating to the financial worth of Gaylord's and there was no guide whereby the jury could determine punitive damages. In First American National Bank of Iuka v. Mitchell, 359 So.2d 1376 (Miss. 1978), the Court held that without a showing of the net worth or financial condition of the defendant, there was no way to measure the punitive damage award. We are of the opinion that the verdict of the jury as to damages is not sustained by the evidence and that the verdict of the jury is contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence on the issue of damages, both actual and punitive, and that the judgment of the lower court should be, and it is, reversed and remanded for a new trial on the issue of damages alone. AFFIRMED AS TO LIABILITY: REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR A NEW TRIAL ON DAMAGES ONLY. PATTERSON, C.J., SMITH and ROBERTSON, P. JJ., and SUGG, WALKER, BROOM, BOWLING and COFER, JJ., concur.