Barnard v. Cohen
This text of 162 N.W. 480 (Barnard v. Cohen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
There was a demurrer to the complaint which was overruled. The defendant assigns this as error, but in the view we take of the case that question is immaterial. An erroneous judgment will not be reversed where recovery is for no more than a nominal amount. Riess v. Delles, 45 Wis. 662.
The principal question presented is: In an action for libel, can there be a recovery of punitory damages if only nominal compensatory damages are found?
Upon this question there is a conflict in the authorities. In the following cases it is held there may be such recovery: McConathy v. Deck, 34 Colo. 461, 83 Pac. 135; Lamport v. Judge & Dolph D. Co. 238 Mo. 409, 141 S. W. 1095. The following cases hold that there may not be such a recovery: First Nat. Bank v. Kansas G. Co. 60 Kan. 30, 55 Pac. 277; Kuhn v. C., M. & St. P. R. Co. 74 Iowa, 137, 37 N. W. 116; Meidel v. Anthis, 71 Ill. 241. This court is committed to the doctrine that punitory damages cannot be recovered in an action where the compensatory damages are merely nominal. We think this rule is based not only upon authority but upon the better reason. Barber v. Kilbourn, 16 Wis. 485; Maxwell v. Kennedy, 50 Wis. 645, 7 N. W. 657. See, also, Bass v. C. & N. W. R. Co. 42 Wis. 654, 672.
By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
162 N.W. 480, 165 Wis. 417, 1917 Wisc. LEXIS 120, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barnard-v-cohen-wis-1917.