Opinion ID: 1146796
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: was the jury's award of actual and consequential damages against the overwhelming weight of the evidence?

Text: Our review of jury awards is limited. As we stated in Miles v. Duckworth, 481 So.2d 757, 759 (Miss. 1985): This Court will not set aside the verdict of a jury on damages unless we are convinced that the verdict resulted from bias, passion or prejudice on the part of the jury; and the verdict is shocking to our conscience on the evidence presented. See Mississippi Farm Bureau Mutual Ins. Co. v. Garrett, 487 So.2d 1320 (Miss. 1986); Jesco, Inc. v. Shannon, 451 So.2d 694 (Miss. 1984); James Reeves, Contractor, Inc. v. Chain, 343 So.2d 1229 (Miss. 1977); Kinnard v. Martin, 223 So.2d 300 (Miss. 1969). We cannot say the jury verdict in this case is such that it must be set aside. The jury was instructed that it could award actual and consequential damages. The jury could have considered the amount of money lost on the shipment not being delivered, the Browns' expenses in staying in Mississippi for nearly five days and the consequential harm resulting from the trailer's detention. The Browns expended $420.00 on food and hotel bills and Brown had to sell his four-month old CB radio at a loss to obtain cash. The jury also could have considered lost business because of the extended stay in Jackson. Raymond Brown, Jr. testified that he intended to deliver the produce and then contract to carry another load, but could not because the trailer was gone. Brown testified that he could have delivered the produce by September 10, giving him two to three days during which he could have obtained and possibly delivered another load. We find no error in the jury award.