Court Opinion

ID: 9620663
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 05:45:33.379536+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:04:52.562493
License: Public Domain

Chief Jusice Sharp
concurring in result.
For the reasons stated in my dissent in Oestreicher v. Stores, 290 N.C. 118, 144, 225 S.E. 2d 797, 813 (1976), I concur in the result reached in the majority opinion with reference to punitive damages. In my view, in neither this case nor in Oestreicher are punitive damages appropriate. Further, I do not think we will clarify the law by overruling Swinton v. Realty Co., 236 N.C. 723, 73 S.E. 2d 785 (1953). On the contrary, this action can only further confuse an area of the law which is rapidly becoming confusion worse confounded.
*117On its facts, the decision in Swinton was clearly correct. It has been cited by each of the five members of the present Court who became members prior to 1 January 1975 as authoritative and as supporting the propositions variously stated as follows:
(1) Punitive damages can be recovered only in tort actions and upon allegations and proof of facts showing actual malice, oppression, gross and willful wrong, insult, indignity or a reckless disregard of plaintiff’s rights. Van Leuven v. Motor Lines, 261 N.C. 539, 546, 135 S.E. 2d 640, 645 (1964). See also Hinson v. Dawson, 244 N.C. 23, 27, 92 S.E. 2d 393, 396 (1956); Lutz Industries, Inc. v. Dixie Home Stores, 242 N.C. 332, 344, 88 S.E. 2d 333, 342 (1955).
(2) Without such a showing, punitive damages cannot be recovered for false representations. Nunn v. Smith, 270 N.C. 374, 377, 154 S.E. 2d 497, 499 (1967); Horne v. Cloninger, 256 N.C. 102, 103, 123 S.E. 2d 112, 113 (1961).
(3) A plaintiff is not entitled to punitive damages in an action for fraud merely upon a showing of misrepresentations which constituted the cause of action (the situation in Swinton). Hardy v. Toler, 288 N.C. 303, 306, 311, 218 S.E. 2d 342, 344, 348 (1975).
(4) It is the general rule that ordinarily exemplary, punitive or vindictive damages are not recoverable in an action for fraud. Davis v. Highway Commission, 271 N.C. 405, 409, 156 S.E. 2d 685, 688 (1967).
(5) With the exception of a breach of promise to marry, punitive damages are not given for breach of contract. King v. Insurance Co., 273 N.C. 396, 398, 159 S.E. 2d 891, 893 (1968).
In my view the foregoing propositions are sound law, and I would not cast doubt upon them by overruling Swinton. An appropriate disposition of this case makes is unnecessary to overrule Swinton or to consider the implications inherent in such a course.
Justices Branch and Moore join in this concurring opinion.