WPC9  7`?: o(`(,V,(QgUu/c:*:>%IbSMe$Tq%4~򾀬׉=YhɃ M7n LDDA րv0V7H&t=OE {mL9,@.LDXa65futW1Y<ejkC-cߞIa{015q87,uTr'L Oy'WǮA(} E' {ѲE{5X3bh\>xҟΖm@pԞd虌~omC3 ,,ݍ>< 66M(,Dy'2oCq)@$Ks>M bCF*,*5S'þ̳9B9KDGDՖsRkoHғС/<! EЌ℣}yh+*# LU NW % 0(w@4'6b>:FU: AQ  0D 0D 0DY Y D/ B B D3 HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLh(9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($ DDDIӀ_#tttttt3|x- - 0#Xd#   ""   XlXXX 8X Xl   Ad FILED XlX 8  July15,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAh ,cAZ"Arial Regular!"#$&C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  (3$ !  ($$   1  ((' dxd dP Pd'''''dxd !  |XX'XXX'TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T   &3r )<,(j 8` `@E` 8ttxP,  rROSALYNNC.DONOHO, 8   )    0      8   )6(XXXX6 Plaintiff/Appellee,  )  AppealNo.      )  01A019802CV00070 0 v.   ) @    )  WilsonCircuit  P WILLIAMJ.DONOHO,JR.,  )  No.8887  `    )t )>.*jx,` `@E\ ` 8ttxP0 , tߛ Defendant/Appellant.  ) 0     )#XX|7#XX  COURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE   APPEALFROMTHECIRCUITCOURTFORWILSONCOUNTYATLEBANON,TENNESSEETHEHONORABLEBOBBYCAPERS,JUDGE9,XXX(XX9  #XX#|XXHUGHGREEN100PublicSquareLebanon,Tennessee37087 ATTORNEYFORPLAINTIFF/APPELLEEJAMESC.McBROOMC.EDWARDSCUDDER,JR.211PrintersAlleyBuilding,Suite502Nashville,Tennessee37201 ATTORNEYSFORDEFENDANT/APPELLANT  ӜAFFIRMEDANDREMANDED   &37XXdXXd7    &3#Xd#     &37XXdXXd7    @  @ WILLIAMB.CAIN,JUDGE :063  &37XXdXXd7    &37*XXdXXd7   ̛  #XX|m#aaXXOPINION    #XXaa^ #|XX9,X4X,XXX9  #XX| #|XXInthiscasedefendantappealsanadversejuryverdictinapersonal d  injuryaction.  Appellantandappelleeweremarriedinthemidseventiesanddivorcedin1983.TheyreconciledaftertheirdivorceandhadbeenlivingtogetherforapproximatelyfiveyearsatthetimeoftheincidentofFebruary20,1993whichprecipitatedthelawsuitatbar.Onthatday,WilliamJ.Donoho,Jr.physicallyassaultedRosalynnC.Donoho.Afteraonedaytrial,ajuryassessed$85,000compensatorydamagesand$15,000punitivedamagesagainstMr.Donoho.Hismotionforanewtrialor,inthealternative,foraremittiturwasoverruledbythetrialcourtandheappealed.    Theissuespresentedforreviewasstatedbytheappellantare:B ( X,X4XB8    1.  Whetherthetrialcourterredindenying l Defendant'sMotionforNewTrial,orinthealternative,aRemittitur,andinapprovingthejuryverdictforcompensatorydamagesintheamountofEightyfiveThousand($85,000.00)DollarswhenthePlaintiffofferedproofofonlyEightHundred,Nineteen($819.00)Dollarsinmedicaldamages?    8    2.  Whetherthetrialcourtcommittedreversible |$# errorinfailingtoexcludeimproperevidenceoftheDefendant'scharacter?    8    3.  Whetherthetrialcourtcommittedreversible '"& errorinadmittingevidenceofthePlaintiff'sreputationwithoutproperfoundation?      Appellantdoesnottakeissuewiththe$15,000punitivedamageawardbutassertsonlythatthe$85,000compensatorydamageawardshouldbereversed.H ( N X ( XH  Appellantdoesnotassertthattheverdictofthejuryisaproductofpassion,prejudiceorcaprice.Theissueassertedisthatthecompensatorydamageawardisabovetherangeofreasonablenessand,assuch,isnotsupportedbytheevidence.  Inthecaseatbar,thetrialcourthasapprovedtheverdictofthejury. 83: Ӝ  In Ellisv.WhiteFreightlinerCorp.,, thesSupremecCourtsaid:  ̛8   N [6]  Thetrialjudge'sapprovalofajuryverdictinvokes " thematerialevidencerulewithrespecttoallotherissuesoffactandweknowofnoreasonwhythatruleshouldnothavethesameeffectwhenthatapprovalincludestheamountoftheaward.Thatactionbythetrialjudgemeansthathehasaccreditedthetestimonyofthewitnessesontheissueofdamagesandhasevaluatedtheevidenceassupportingtheamountawarded.Nevertheless,whenthequestionofremittiturisraised,theCourtofAppealshasthedutytoreviewtheproofofdamagesandtheauthoritytoreduceanexcessiveaward.Butwhenthetrialjudgehasapprovedtheverdict,thereviewintheCourtofAppealsissubjecttotherulethatifthereisanymaterialevidencetosupporttheaward,itshouldnotbedisturbed.    8   N WeaffirmtheseguidelinesandcaveatsinSouthernR.R.  Co.v.Sloan,supra:   8  8N     "Thereisnoexactyardstick,ormeasurement,whichthiscourtmayuseasaguidetodeterminethesizeofverdictswhichwouldshouldbepermittedtostandincasesofthiskind.Eachcasemustdependuponitsownfactsandthetesttobeappliedbyusisnotwhatamountthemembersofthecourtwouldhaveawardedhadtheybeenonthejury,orwhatthey,asanappellatecourt,thinkshouldhavebeenawarded,butwhethertheverdictispatentlyexcessive.Theamountofdamagesawardedinsimilarcasesispersuasivebutnotconclusive,and,inevaluatingtheawardinothercases,weshouldnotethedateoftheaward,andtakeintoconsiderationinflationandthereducedvalueoftheindividualdollar."56Tenn.App.at392393,407S.W.2dat211. N N  8   N Wealsoreiteratethatafindingofexcessivenessnecessarilyinvolvesadeterminationofthedollarfigurethatrepresentsthepointatwhichexcessivenessbegins,andthatfigureistheupperlimitoftherangeofreasonableness.Inthiscase,asdistinguishedfromSmithv.Shelton,supra,allof ,R'% theevidenceintherecordthattendstosupporttheamountoftheverdictshouldbegivenfullfaithandcredituponappellatereview.     Ellisv.WhiteFreightlinerCorp. ,603S.W.2d125,129(Tenn.1980).Hence,the R1,* onlyquestionforthiscourttoconsideriswhetherthereismaterialevidencetosupporttheawardbelow.̛  TheevidencebelowshowedMrs.DonohowasphysicallyassaultedbyMr.Donoho.Theresultsofhisassaultuponheraregraphicallyillustratedbythe M944 record.Thephotographicevidencerevealedextensivefacialandbodilyinjury.BothMrs.Donohoandlaywitnessestestifiedthatshesuffersgreatembarrassment,humiliationandsevereemotionaldistressasaresultoftheassault.Whileitistruethattheonlymedicalbillsinevidencewere$819.00paidtoDonlesonHospital;Mrs.DonohofurthertestifiedwithoutobjectionfromthedefendantthatshehadrequiredmedicalandpsychologicaltreatmentinArizonaandthatshehadbeendiagnosedassufferingfromposttraumaticstresssyndrome.Shewascompelledtotakeantidepressantmedications.TheevidenceindicatesthatMrs.Donohowasaprofessional,careerorientedwomanandverysuccessfulinherbusiness.AftertheFebruary20,1993incidentshewasforcedtoliveinamotelforfiveweeks,toodepressed,embarrassedandhumiliatedtogotoworkduringthisperiodortoeatoutbecauseofherinjuries.  TheevidenceconcerningthedamagessufferedbyMrs.Donohoismorethansufficienttosupporttheverdict.The$85,000awardisnotbeyondtherangeofreasonableness.ItistruethattheevidenceconcerningMrs.Donoho'streatmentinArizonawasnotsupportedbymedicaltestimony.Herowntestimony,admittedinevidencewithoutobjectionbythedefendant,isadequatetosupportthejury'sverdict.  Appellantfurtherobjectedtotestimonyassertingthatthedefendantneglectedhischildrenbyapreviousmarriageuntiltheywereintheirmidteensandallowedhisminorson,Jay,todrinkalcoholandusedrugsintheirhome.ThisevidencecameinduringthetestimonyofMrs.DonohoandfurtherduringthetestimonyofMr.DonohoandhissonJay.ItgenerallyestablishedsomeofthefactorsleadinguptotheexplosiveincidentofFebruary20,1993.  Appellantfurtherassertsthatthetrialcourterredinadmittinganadvertisingbrochuredepictingtheplaintiff,alongwithotherprofessionalsinherfieldofendeavor.ThisdocumentiscumulativetothetestimonyofotherwitnesseswhotestifiedtotheeffectthatMrs.Donohowasahardworkerandprofessionallyaccomplished.Forthepurposesoffered,theevidencewasadmissible.Eveniftheadmissibilitywerequestionable,itcannotbesaidthatsuchevidence,moreprobablythannot,affectedthejudgment. See Tenn.R.App.P. H94B 36(b).Inthisrespecttherefore,thejuryverdictstands.  Thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisinallrespectsaffirmed.Thecaseisremandedtothetrialcourtforfurtherproceedings.Thewithcostsofthisappealareassassessedagainstappellant,theappellants.WilliamJ.Donoho,Jr.   N     ________________________________   N     WILLIAMB.CAIN,JUDGECONCUR:__________________________________HENRYF.TODD,PRESIDINGJUDGE__________________________________WILLIAMC.KOCH,JR.,JUDGE