ÿWPCç% a¿üFç4†6BMbÀ%Uoæ>†4Bw–¤Cµ¡÷“À%ü¤ýdz«táÊïõöÕÊù ü¼UPsýìj;¸'§ÿ_ç6‘Îë @B=vçw8ùA•ºB\]¯¨]'Å‹™a›ÿNŒ«‹Ê4U‹ø]-¢^ òS&U—ƒiE‡¦`Ågý8”¹EÝ¡Ua½—£C8$ÉÁ‹áiÈü Ì!?5öûœ†ŸßêÊVÉ¿3½§„WÕ™Kõè ÿ—}€´â&-Pü‚R½kI0†VõûÅ}–=ເÜýVÍÝm™â`w¥—§~%EÄ›-* ÅÔ7ÏÑÛåªJ%ªi‘i„ ~pn—ˆHKc'T1ïe׳e({Ío®Ž'àòIŸtåf;@‘Û£/Ðo: )'V:Tøáªð1æ?ÛçÖ·u ·ÐL ÛR?¢ë­é^lÔC(iÏIñîÄÓÅnÕ™6cOˆdy8AÈb#É\ %% ^ + 0ˆ7 UN¿ w 4 z% ÒŸ q € m‚ , ™ ÆÅÆ‹ÆQÆ ÝNè 0Dê.EDDDD–FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFbÜ Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü Ü 0ëä ä ä ä BÏ!Ï! 0¤ì! D3" D-Ã" 0Kð"ð" AS;#ÆŽ# 0¤T$ 0Dø$ A«<%˜\\IB01S01\CLERK1NASÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»‚51Ï (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman RegularEbÜ0B011C8 ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ  COAConklinDunlapyallknuckleboomNeeceskidders[i]tMRremittiturDeWayne S.W.WyrickColsherMedlin T]he BainWillbankPeeryUebelackerTenn.Ct.App cmtWillbanks TooffactfinderMeltonFancherCrumleyGuinanHostetterVadenHeiskdecisis FawLazenbygenderedBrysonBramlettN.G.S.R. HeisGarrett Suth SedgWiggin StoMageeByramoverbroadLinthicumdull[ingT.C.A.NatlHibschmanBatchelorInd.Ct.AppGarrardtortiousTestermanDetlingChockleyProsserCrabtreeMasonaryT]rialAmConpropterdefectumaffectumYatesHodge VidaMooneyhamMcDowellMayfieldShockleysSkoretzCowdenBellefonteinsurorsinsurorMooersunfindBeatyMcGrawMoselythat thatT.R.C.P.HillerHaileyShockleyCt.AppMcLemoreTenn.Appdispositive ZachMcLeodunpleadedRaimi Fl.Dist.Ct.AppMantiaMo.Ct.AppRaderTormaschyMcKinneyTex.Ct.AppN.C.R. J.M.Westall CibaGeigyN.C.AppJurisSecundumpromisorC.J.S.PartinTenn.Crim.AppCoverdellDeptLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 Ý ƒR7õ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôáÅò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€The€discussion€by€this€court€of€this€rule€in€òòEmerson€v.€Garneróó,€732€S.W.2d€613€(Tenn.Ct.App.€1987)€startsÐ ° Ðwith€the€general€observation€that€ð ðnormally€in€tort€law€there€must€be€some€injury€resulting€in€òònominal€óódamages€at€leastÐ tÄ Ðbefore€punitive€damages€can€be€assessed.ðð€€732€S.W.2d€at€614.€(emphasis€added)€(the€word€ð ðnominalðð€is€apparentlyÐ 8ˆ Ðinadvertent€and€should€read€ð ðactual.ðð€€The€quote€as€it€is€written€is€inconsistent€with€the€authority€cited€in€the€opinionÐ üL Ðholding€that€ð ðactual€damage€must€be€found€as€a€predicate€for€the€recovery€of€exemplary€damages,ðð€which€is€taken€fromÐ À ÐòòAllen€v.€Meltonóó,€20€Ô_ÔTenn.AppÔ_Ô.€387,€99€S.W.2d€219€(Tenn.Ct.App.€1936)€and€from€òòWhittington€v.€Grand€Valley€Lakes,Ð „Ô ÐInc.óó,€547€S.W.2d€241€(Tenn.€1977).€€€The€discussion€in€both€òòAllenóó€and€òòWhittingtonóó€makes€it€clear€that€in€Tennessee€andÐ H ˜ Ðby€the€majority€rule€nominal€damages€are€not€a€sufficient€basis€upon€which€a€punitive€damage€award€may€be€made.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó Ñ ° Ñ ŒÝ ƒR7õ$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôáÅò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€One€is€reminded€of€Winston€Churchillððs€lament€at€the€time€of€the€impending€fall€of€the€port€of€Singapore€toÐ ° Ðthe€Japanese€when€he€was€informed€that€all€guns€were€pointed€seaward€and€none€toward€the€landward€approaches€in€theÐ tÄ Ðrear.€€ð ðThe€possibility€of€Singapore€having€no€landward€defenses€no€more€entered€my€mind€than€that€of€a€battleship€beingÐ 8ˆ Ðlaunched€without€bottom.ðð€€Winston€S.€Churchill,€The€Second€World€War,€v.€4,€ð ðThe€Hinge€of€Fateðð€p.€49.€- ù-(|G27õ$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€B»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôáÅò»»Ô d(|3G‚$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€B»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3G‚$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€B»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€B»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼B»»»ÔÑ8€1XXdì»»d8ÑÑ  ÑÑ€OY Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îT BÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼B»îîT -#ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓMay€6,€2004€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X1X»¼BÔÌò òÔ#†¼B»XX1#ÔCARL€SHOCKLEY,€òòet€al.óó€v.€JOSEPH€F.€CROSBY,€òòet€alóó.Ô‡X1X»¼BÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Van€Buren€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€1218„C€€€€€€Larry€B.€Stanley,€Jr.,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2003„00794„COA„R3„CV€„€Filed€September€21,€2004ó óÔ#†¼B»XX1”#ÔÔ‡X1X»¼BÔò ò€Ð ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€appeal€arises€from€a€claim€filed€in€Van€Buren€County€Circuit€Court€alleging€breach€of€contract,Ð xÈ  Ðoutrageous€conduct,€and€assault.€€At€the€close€of€the€plaintiffððs€proof,€the€trial€court€granted€theÐ d´ Ðdefendantsðð€motion€for€a€directed€verdict€on€the€outrageous€conduct€claim.€€At€the€close€of€all€theÐ P  Ðproof,€the€trial€court€granted€the€plaintiffððs€motion€for€a€directed€verdict€on€the€breach€of€contractÐ <Œ Ðclaim,€and€the€parties€then€stipulated€that€the€assault€had€occurred.€€The€case€went€to€the€jury€forÐ (x Ðconsideration€of€the€damages€resulting€from€the€breach€and€the€assault.€€The€jury€returned€a€verdictÐ d Ðof€$57,500€for€the€breach€of€contract€and€specifically€found€that€the€assault€did€not€cause€injury€toÐ P ÐCarl€Shockley€for€which€compensatory€damages€should€be€awarded.€€Nonetheless€the€jury€did€findÐ ì< Ðthat€Joseph€Crosby€acted€in€such€a€way€that€punitive€damages€should€be€awarded.€€The€trial€court€Ð Ø( Ðrefused€to€submit€the€punitive€damages€issue€to€the€jury€and€granted€a€remittitur€of€$7,500€on€theÐ Ä Ðcontract€claim.€€BÔ#†¼B»XX1S#ÔÔ‡X1X»¼BÔoth€parties€appeal.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ð ° ÐÓæÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€CircuitÐ ˆØ ÐAffirmed€and€RemandedÐ tÄ Ðó óÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼B»àX1á #ÔÔ‡X1X.¼BÔWilliam€B.€Cain,óó€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòPatricia€J.€Cottrell,óó€and€òòFrankÐ L œ ÐG.€Clement,€Jr.,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð 8!ˆ  ÐÌMichael€P.€Mills€and€Aaron€J.€Conklin,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Carl€Shockley,€d/b/aÐ #`" ÐÔ_ÔShockleyÔ_Ô„Conner€Logging€and€Shockley€Logging.Ð ü#L# ÐÌThomas€A.€Greer,€Jr.,€Dunlap,€Tennessee€and€J.€Hilton€Conger,€Smithville,€Tennessee,€for€theÐ Ô%$!% Ðappellees,€Joseph€F.€Crosby€and€Opal€M.€Crosby.Ð À&"& ÐÓì ÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼B»XX1 #ÔÔ‡X1X»¼BÔÐ ˜(è#( ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼B»XX1Ä #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X1X»¼BÔà  àThe€parties€to€this€appeal€entered€into€a€logging€contract€whereby€Ô_ÔShockleyÔ_Ô„ConnerÐ p*À%* Ð[Shockley]€Logging€would€cut€and€haul€timber€from€Crosbyððs€multi„acre€tract€in€Van€Buren€County.€Ð \+¬&+ ÐCarl€Shockley€and€Joe€Crosby€were€introduced€by€an€intermediary€and€mutual€friend€R.€J.€Bowling,Ð H,˜', Ðwho€noticed€Ô_ÔShockleyÔ_Ôððs€industrious€nature€and€the€potential€in€his€friend€Joseph€Crosbyððs€primeÐ 4-„(-ý ÐÔ_Ôtimber€and€sought€to€facilitate€a€working€relationship€between€the€two.€€Unfortunately€the€businessÐ ° Ðrelationship€did€not€go€as€Mr.€Bowling€had€hoped.Ð œì ÐÌà  àMr.€Crosby€and€Carl€Shockley,€with€his€partner€at€the€time€J.€C.€Conner,€entered€into€theÐ tÄ Ðlogging€contract€on€May€19,€2000.€€Pursuant€to€the€terms€of€this€contract€Shockley€agreed€to€ð ðthinÐ `° Ðmerchantable€hardwood€and€pine€timber,€to€cut€all€Virginia€pine€and€60%€yellow€pine€leaving€25Ð L œ Ðto€26€hardwood€trees€per€acre.ðð€€Crosby€and€Shockley€were€to€divide€the€proceeds€on€all€timberÐ 8 ˆ Ðexcept€for€hardwood€and€pulpwood€on€a€two€to€one€ratio.€€For€the€hardwood€and€pulpwood€CrosbyÐ $ t Ðwas€to€receive€$3€per€ton€of€timber€processed.€€The€contract€specifically€provided:Ð  ` ÐÌÓ  Óòò9.€€LIABILITYóó€Ð è 8  ÐÓóÓà8  àà ` àLANDOWNER/TIMBER€OWNER€shall€in€no€way€be€liable€or€responsibleÐ Ô$  Ðfor€any€injury€or€damage€done€or€occasioned€by€the€action€and€operations€ofÐ À  ÐCONTRACTOR€under€this€agreement,€and€CONTRACTOR€binds€and€obligatesÐ ¬ü  Ðitself€to€pay€and€satisfy€any€and€all€claims€arising€on€account€of€its€employees€orÐ ˜è  Ðother€persons,€or€damage€to€any€type€of€property,€and€CONTRACTOR€further€agreesÐ „Ô  Ðto€indemnify€and€hold€harmless€from€against€any€and€all€liability,€claims,€loss€injuryÐ pÀ Ðor€damage€that€is€caused€in€whole€or€part€by€the€negligence€of€its€agents€andÐ \¬ Ðemployees.ÐH˜Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` à.€.€.Ð  p ÐÌÓ  Óà8 @ àòò13.€€NON„TERMINATION€OF€LANDOWNER/TIMBER€OWNERóóÐ øH ÐÓRÓà8  àà ` àLANDOWNER/TIMBER€OWNER€shall€not€terminate€or€attempt€toÐ ä4 Ðterminate€this€Contract,€or€otherwise€attempt€to€stop€CONTRACTOR€from€cuttingÐ Ð  Ðor€converting€timber€which€is€subject€to€this€contract€after€CONTRACTOR€hasÐ ¼  Ðbegun€work€until€all€timber€designated€above€has€been€cut€and€converted,€unlessÐ ¨ø ÐCONTRACTOR€is€not€following€the€cutting€agreement€of€leaving€proper€number€ofÐ ”ä Ðtrees€per€acre€as€stipulated€by€LANDOWNER/TIMBER€OWNER€and€leaving€topsÐ €Ð Ðtrimmed€flat€on€ground.Ðl¼Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€term€of€the€contract€was€to€be€four€years.€€The€tract€of€land€was€in€excess€of€800€acres.€Ð D!” ÐShockleyððs€undisputed€testimony€at€trial€showed€that€during€the€course€of€performance€CrosbyÐ 0"€  Ðfrequently€directed€the€cutting€of€underbrush€and€resizing€of€stumps.€€The€net€effect€of€CrosbyððsÐ #l! Ðactions€arguably€increased€the€burden€upon€Shockley€to€perform€under€the€contract.€€NonethelessÐ $X" ÐShockley€continued€to€log€the€property€with€the€help€of€subcontractors€including€his€brother€DonnyÐ ô$D # ÐShockley.€€This€increasingly€difficult€relationship€culminated€in€an€incident€on€November€5,€2001,Ð à%0!$ Ðwhich€served€as€the€basis€for€Shockleyððs€complaint€in€Van€Buren€County€Circuit€Court.Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àImmediately€prior€to€November€5,€Crosby€had€voiced€concern€about€the€lack€of€liabilityÐ ¤(ô#' Ðinsurance€covering€trucks€in€Shockleyððs€service.€€In€fact,€Crosby€had€confronted€Shockley€on€at€leastÐ )à$( Ðtwo€€occasions,€the€last€being€the€November€5€incident.€€Donny€Shockley€describes€the€incident€thus:Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àHad€Mr.€Crosby€come€back€to€the€back€of€the€property€before€you€gotÐ ° Ðloaded?МìÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àYeah.Ð ˆØ Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àAll€right.€€And€what€happened€then€when€he€came€back€to€the€backÐ tÄ Ðof€the€property?Ð`°Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àWell,€he€had€told€Carl€that€there€wasnððt€going€to€be€no€loads€go€outÐ L œ Ðof€there€and€he€basically€was€just€going€to€shut€him€down,€you€know.Ð8 ˆÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDid€he€say€why?Ð $ t Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àWell,€when€he€spoke€to€me,€I€told€him€he€would€have€to€talk€withÐ  ` ÐCarl,€you€know.€€But€it€was€because€like€I€didnððt€have€no€insurance€on€my€truck.Ðü L Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àOkay.€€Were€you€aware€of€any€rule€or€law€that€required€you€to€haveÐ è 8  Ðinsurance€on€your€logging€truck€at€that€time?ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àThere€werenððt€none.Ð À  Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àWere€you€aware€of€any€contractual€provisions€between€you€and€CarlÐ ¬ü  ÐShockley€that€you€have€insurance?Иè Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo.Ð „Ô  Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDid€you€work€for€Carl€as€far€as€your€hauling,€or€did€you€work€for€Mr.Ð pÀ ÐCrosby?Ð\¬Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àI€worked€for€Carl.Ð H˜ Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àYou€never€had€any€direct€dealing€as€far€as€Mr.€Crosby?Ð4„Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo.Ð  p Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àHe€didnððt€pay€you?Ð  \ Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo.Ð øH Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àAfter€Mr.€Crosby€came€to€the€back€of€the€property€while€yaððll€wereÐ ä4 Ðloading€and€said€there€wasnððt€going€to€be€any€more€hauling€off€there€that€day,€whatÐ Ð  Ðdid€yaððll€do?м Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àWell,€Carl,€he€told€me€to€haul€it€out€of€there,€you€know,€take€the€loadÐ ¨ø Ðout,€and€thatððs€what€I€did.€€I€was€working€for€him.ДäÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àAnd€did€you€head€towards€the€front€of€the€property?ЀÐÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àYes.Ð l¼ Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àWhich€road€were€you€heading€towards?€€Which€highway?ÐX ¨Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àI€was€heading€to€111.Ð D!” Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àAll€right.€€And€did€you€get€there?Ð 0"€  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo.Ð #l! Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àWhat€happened€before€you€got€there?Ð $X" Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àMr.€Crosby€stopped€me€and€blocked€the€road.Ðô$D #Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àHow€did€he€block€the€road?Ð à%0!$ Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àHe€pulled€the€truck€crossways€with€a€trailer€behind€it€and€then€just€gotÐ Ì&"% Ðout€of€the€truck€with€the€gun.€€He€just€had€„€„€you€know,€he€was€pointing€at€me.€€SoÐ ¸'#& ÐI€called€Carl€on€the€radio,€CB,€told€him€what€was€happening.€€And€Carl€told€me€justÐ ¤(ô#' Ðget€out€of€the€truck€and€he€would€be€right€there.Ð)à$(Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDid€you€say€anything€to€Mr.€Crosby€while€you€were€waiting?Ð|*Ì%)Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo.Ð h+¸&* Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDid€he€say€anything€else€to€you?Ð ° Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àHe€just€told€me€I€wasnððt€going€to€take€that€truck€out€of€there.МìÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDid€you€threaten€him€in€any€way?Ð ˆØ Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo.Ð tÄ Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDid€you€move€like€you€were€going€to€hit€him?à  àÐ `° Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo.Ð L œ Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDid€you€grab€a€gun?Ð 8 ˆ Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo.Ð $ t Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àA€knife?Ð  ` Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo.Ð ü L  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àPick€up€a€stick,€anything?Ð è 8  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àI€froze.Ð Ô$  Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àOkay.€€How€long€was€it€before€Carl€came€up?ÐÀ Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àProbably€just€minutes.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àà ` à.€.€.€.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àAnd€did€yaððll€leave?Ð\¬Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àYes.Ð H˜ Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àAll€right.€€Did€you€leave€your€truck€there?Ð 4„ Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àYes.Ð  p Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àLoaded?Ð  \ Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àYes,€it€was€loaded.Ð øH Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDid€yaððll€get€it€back€later?Ð ä4 Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àLater€we€did,€yes.Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àMr.€Crosby€let€you€go€get€it?Ð ¼  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àYes.Ð ¨ø Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àAll€right.€€You€hauled€it€on€out€of€there€then?ДäÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àYeah.Ð €Ð Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDid€you€ever€talk€to€Mr.€Crosby€after€that?à È àà  àÐl¼Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àHuh„uh€(negative).Ð X ¨ Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àHow€did€Mr.€Crosby€look€when€he€was€standing€there€holding€thatÐ D!” Ðgun?Ð0"€ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àHe€looked€scared,€you€know,€or€shook€up.€€I€was€pretty€scared€myself.Ð#l!Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àÌà  àHis€version€tracks€fairly€closely€to€that€given€by€the€plaintiff€in€his€testimony:Ð ô$D # Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àAre€we€on€November€5,€2001€now?Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àYes.Ð Ì&"% Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àLast€day?Ð ¸'#& Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àLast€day.Ð ¤(ô#' Ðâ âà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àWhat€happened?Ð )à$( Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àHe€come€up€with€a€little€guy.€€I€canððt€remember€his€name.€€I€canððtÐ ° Ðremember.€€I€always€called€him€little€bald„headed€guy.€€You€know,€not€meaning€noÐ œì Ðdisrespect.ЈØÐ Ð  Ðâ âà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àI€didnððt€take€any.€€Iððve€got€a€little€left.Ð tÄ Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àAnyhow,€he€was€leaned€over€on€the€hood,€and€Joe€got€out€of€his€truckÐ `° Ðand€come€over€there,€and€I€was€loading€the€truck.€€And€I€shut€the€knuckleboom€off.€Ð L œ ÐJoe€said:€I€told€you,€you€ainððt€taking€another€truck€out€of€here€without€insurance€„€„Ð 8 ˆ Ðor€that€truck.€€It€may€have€been€that€truck,€Iððm€not€sure€about€that.Ð$ tÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àà ¸ àI€said,€Joe,€Iððve€got€a€contract€to€fill,€and€I€got€bills.€€And€I€said,€now€„Ð  ` Є€I€donððt€know€if€this€is€exactly€the€way€I€worded€it,€but€anyhow,€I€told€him€to€eitherÐ ü L  Ðget€a€court€order€or€the€law€to€put€me€out€of€there.Ðè 8 Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àà ¸ àAnd€he€said,€Iððve€got€your€court€order€at€the€gate.€€But€there€ainððt€noÐ Ô$  Ðgate€anywhere€on€that€property.ÐÀ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àWhat€was€he€talking€about€with€the€gate,€did€you€know?Ьü Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àI€figured€he€was€going€to€have€the€law€there,€is€what€I€figured.Иè Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àOut€at€the€front€of€the€property?Ð „Ô  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àYes,€sir.Ð pÀ Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àWhat€was€your€understanding€about€the€conversations€that€had€goneÐ \¬ Ðon€before€that€between€the€lawyers?ÐH˜Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àTo€my€knowledge,€I€had€the€right€to€keep€right€on€working.€€ThatððsÐ 4„ Ðwhat€you€told€me.Ð pÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àGo€ahead€from€there€then.Ð  \ Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àDonny€went€out€with€the€truck.€€We€finished€loading€it.€€I€donððt€know,Ð øH Ðit€was€fifteen€minutes,€I€guess.€€€€€It€was€maybe€a€little€longer,€maybe€a€few€minutesÐ ä4 Ðless.€€Donny€went€out,€and€the€next€thing€I€know,€I€heard€the€radio,€CB€radio€saying:€Ð Ð  ÐYou€better€come€over€here.м Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àIt€was€Donny?Ð ¨ø Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àYes.Ð ”ä Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àOkay.Ð €Ð Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àSo€me€and€Toby€just€got€in€the€truck€and€drove€over€there.Ðl¼Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` à.€.€.€.Ð D!” ÐÌà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àOkay.Ð #l! Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àAnd€when€we€pulled€up€and€Donny€was€setting€in€the€road,€we€kindlyÐ $X" Ðpulled€over€to€the€side€of€the€back€of€Donnyððs€truck€where€we€could€see.€€And€JoeÐ ô$D # Ðwas€standing€there€with€a€gun€on€Donny.€€And€Donny€was€standing€in€front€of€theÐ à%0!$ Ðtruck.ÐÌ&"%Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àHow€was€Mr.€Crosby€holding€the€gun?Ð ¸'#& Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àThis€(indicating).€€Not€like€this€(indicating).€But€like€that€(indicating),Ð ¤(ô#' Ðwith€the€barrel€towards€Donny.Ð)à$(Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àAnd€you€and€Toby€got€out€of€the€truck?Ð |*Ì%) Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àYes.Ð h+¸&* Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àWhat€happened€next?Ð ° Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àI€walked€up€there,€you€know,€and€I€thought€maybe€he€was€kidding€orÐ œì Ðsomething,€you€know.€€And€I€said:€Joe,€you€mean€you€are€going€to€pull€a€gun€on€me.€Ð ˆØ ÐHe€turned€around€toward€me€and€Toby.€€And€to€me€it€looked€like€the€barrel€was€rightÐ tÄ Ðtowards€me.€€And€he€said:€I€already€have.Ð`°Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àWhat€did€you€say?Ð L œ Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àI€didnððt€say€nothing.Ð 8 ˆ Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àHow€did€you€feel?Ð $ t Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àI€donððt€know,€not€good.Ð  ` Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àWere€you€scared?Ð ü L  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àI€would€say€probably€so.€€He€was€sure€red„faced.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àShockley€further€explains€his€state€of€mind€resulting€from€this€confrontation€on€cross„Ð À  Ðexamination:Ð ¬ü  Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àYou€told€Mr.€Mills€a€while€ago€when€he€asked€you,€how€did€you€feel?€Ð ˜è  ÐYou€said,€I€donððt€know.€€You€donððt€know€how€you€felt?Ð„Ô Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àKindly€weak€kneed.Ð pÀ Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àAnd€when€you€left€„€„€where€did€you€go€when€you€left?Ð\¬Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àI€went€and€called€Mr.€Mills.Ð H˜ Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àSo€you€didnððt€call€the€sheriffððs€department?Ð 4„ Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo,€sir.Ð  p Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDidnððt€come€out€here€and€file€a€report€about€it?Ð \Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo,€sir.Ð øH Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àWere€you€at€home€when€you€called€Mr.€Mills?Ð ä4 Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àI€went€straight€home.Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDid€you€go€to€a€doctor?Ð ¼  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo,€sir,€not€then.Ð ¨ø Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àWell,€have€you€seen€a€psychiatrist?Ð ”ä Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo.Ð €Ð Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àHave€you€seen€a€psychologist?Ð l¼ Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àI€donððt€know€what€one€of€them€is.Ð X ¨ Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àHad€any€counseling€because€of€this€incident?Ð D!” Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo,€sir.Ð 0"€  Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àHadnððt€seen€a€mental€health€counselor€or€anything€because€of€this?Ð#l!Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo,€sir.Ð $X" Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àTaking€any€medication€because€of€it?Ðô$D #Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo,€sir.Ð à%0!$ Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àHave€you€seen€a€doctor€because€of€this?Ð Ì&"% Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àI€donððt€know€if€itððd€be€because€of€that€or€not.Ð ¸'#& Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDid€you€start€another€job€shortly€after€this?Ð ¤(ô#' Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àIt€was€„€„€well,€from€then€until€right€around€December,€the€middle€ofÐ )à$( ÐDecember,€the€15th€or€16th,€I€guess.Ð|*Ì%)Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àSo€you€were€able€to€go€back€to€work?Ð h+¸&* Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àAfter€a€while,€yes.Ð ° Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àWell,€it€wasnððt€because€you€had€a€gun€pointed€at€you€that€you€werenððtÐ œì Ðable€to€work,€was€it,€Mr.€Shockley?ЈØÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo.Ð tÄ Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àJust€didnððt€have€something€else€to€go€to€right€then?Ð`°Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àJust€kindly€set€around€the€house.Ð L œ Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àBut€it€wasnððt€because€of€this€incident,€was€it?Ð 8 ˆ Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àProbably€not.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àIn€addition€to€the€claim€for€outrageous€conduct€and€assault,€the€plaintiff€provided€an€involvedÐ ü L  Ðestimation€of€damages€suffered€by€Crosbyððs€breach€of€the€contract.€€The€result€of€that€equation€givenÐ è 8  Ðon€direct€testimony€was€an€estimate€of€$122,000€in€damages,€which€would€translate€to€$61,000€ofÐ Ô$  Ðnet€profit€per€year€remaining€in€the€contract€term.€€Excerpts€of€the€plaintiffððs€tax€returns€on€file€asÐ À  ÐExhibits€6€and€7€to€the€testimony€do€not€support€this€estimate.€€Exhibit€6,€Plaintiff€Carl€ShockleyððsÐ ¬ü  ÐSchedule€C€from€the€1040€Form€for€tax€year€2000,€claims€gross€receipts€of€$28,323.€€The€ScheduleÐ ˜è  ÐC€form€representing€tax€year€2001€shows€gross€receipts€of€$50,786.€€In€addition€to€these€alternativeÐ „Ô  Ðamounts,€the€plaintiff€testified€that€as€a€result€of€Crosbyððs€breach€he€suffered€the€repossession€of€aÐ pÀ Ðpiece€of€lumber€equipment:Ð \¬ ÐÌà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àNow€you€talked€about€some€of€the€equipment€you€bought€too.€€DidÐ 4„ Ðyou€lose€some€of€your€equipment?Ð pÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àYes,€sir,€I€did.Ð  \ Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àWhat€did€you€lose?Ð øH Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àI€lost€a€cutter,€sheerer.Ð ä4 Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àIs€that€what€you€bought€from€Mr.€Prater?Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo,€Mr.€Neece.Ð ¼  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àAnd€how€much€did€you€say€you€paid€for€the€cutter?Ð ¨ø Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àSeventeen€thousand€dollars.Ð ”ä Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àYou€paid€seventeen€for€the€cutter?Ð €Ð Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àYes.Ð l¼ Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àSeventeen€thousand€dollars€for€the€cutter,€and€how€much€had€you€paidÐ X ¨ Ðon€it?ÐD!”Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àSeventy„five€hundred.Ð 0"€  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àWhat€happened€to€the€cutter?Ð #l! Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àWell,€I€was€off€work€and€didnððt€have€no€work€from€the€time€he€shutÐ $X" Ðme€down€from€the€15th€of€December€and€couldnððt€make€the€payments€on€the€fiveÐ ô$D # Ðhundred€a€week.Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àà ¸ àThe€man€called€me€and€said€either€catch€your€payments€up€or€bringÐ Ì&"% Ðit€back.€€So€I€took€it€back.и'#&Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDo€you€know€what€he€did€with€it?Ð ¤(ô#' Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àHe€sold€it.Ð )à$( Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDid€you€have€to€pay€any€more€money€after€that?Ð|*Ì%)Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo.Ð h+¸&* Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDid€you€get€seventy„five€hundred€dollars€back?Ð ° Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo.Ð œì Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDid€you€get€the€cutter€back?Ð ˆØ Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo.Ð tÄ Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àYou€just€lost€that?Ð `° Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àRight.Ð L œ Ðà8  àà ` àÐ Ð Ð  Ðà  àFor€his€part€the€defendant€Crosby€put€on€two€witnesses.€€The€first€one,€Don€Sullivan€workedÐ $ t Ðfor€Carl€Shockley€for€two€months€from€June€to€July€of€2000.€€The€second,€Winton€Humble€ran€aÐ  ` Ðmid„sized€lumber€operation€in€Van€Buren€County.€€The€proof€at€trial€showed€that€Humble,€Shockley,Ð ü L  Ðand€Crosby€entered€into€another€agreement€regarding€Crosbyððs€property€which€provided:Ð è 8  ÐÌà8  àà ` àThis€agreement€is€between€Carl€Shockley€Logging€(Carl€Shockley€owner)€andÐ À  ÐWinton€Humble€Logging€(Winton€Humble€owner).Ьü Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àThis€agreement€is€that€Carl€Shockley€agrees€to€allow€Humble€Logging€toÐ ˜è  Ðcontinuously€log€the€Crosby€Farm€and€in€return€Humble€Logging€agrees€to€cut€logsÐ „Ô  Ðfor€Shockley€Logging€at€no€cost€to€Shockley.€€The€log€cutting€to€be€done€by€machineÐ pÀ Ðand€to€the€specification€(as€low€to€the€ground€as€feasability€possible)€as€in€the€originalÐ \¬ Ðcontract€with€Shockley.€€This€agreement€will€be€binding€to€both€parties€after€signingÐ H˜ Ðand€approval€of€the€owner€of€Crosby€Farms,€Joseph€F.€Crosby.Ð4„Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àHumble€testified€that€this€agreement€was€entered€into€in€January€of€2001,€and€that€prior€toÐ  \ Ðthat€time€only€75€acres€of€the€800+€acre€tract€had€been€logged.€€In€addition€and€as€a€result€of€thisÐ øH Ðagreement,€by€June€of€2001,€400€acres€of€the€tract€had€been€logged.€€He€offered€the€followingÐ ä4 Ðtestimony€regarding€the€plaintiffððs€estimate€of€his€damages€resulting€from€the€breach:Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àIs€there€any€way€that€a€man€of€your€experience€could€set€here€todayÐ ¨ø Ðand€estimate€what€he€is€going€to€make€out€of€that€tract€of€timber,€accurately€estimate?ДäÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àA.à ¸ àNo€way.Ð €Ð Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àWhy?Ð l¼ Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àMarket€fluctuations€and€you€donððt€know€what€you€are€going€to€haveÐ X ¨ Ðto€spend€on€road€maintenance€or€road€building,€or€anything€else€to€get€the€remainingÐ D!” Ðtimber€out.€€But€timber€prices€fluctuate€three€times€a€year,€Spring,€Summer,€and€Fall.€Ð 0"€  ÐThere€are€there€totally€different€timber€prices.€Ð#l!Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDo€expenses€fluctuate?Ð $X" Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àSure.€€You€donððt€never€know€when€you€are€going€to€blow€up€anÐ ô$D # Ðengine€in€the€skidder€or€knuckleboom€or€bust€a€tire€on€a€skidder.Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àDo€fuel€costs€fluctuate?Ð Ì&"% Ðà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àYes,€not€as€much€as€the€other€stuff,€you€know.€€Itððs€fifty€cents€a€gallonÐ ¸'#& Ðon€fuel,€and€just€depending€on€what€you€burn,€you€know.Ф(ô#'Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àQ.à ¸ àMr.€Shockley€here€has€estimated€that€he€would€have€a€profit€out€ofÐ )à$( Ðâ âthat€two€hundred€twenty„five€acres€of€timber€of€one€hundred€twenty„two€thousandÐ |*Ì%) Ðdollars,€profit€to€him.€€Is€there€any€way€you€can€set€here€today€and€estimate€that,Ð ° Ðaccurately€estimate€that?МìÐ Ð  Ðâ âà8  àà ` àA.à ¸ àI€couldnððt.€€I€donððt€know€anybody€else€that€could.ЈØÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àPrior€to€putting€on€these€witnesses€the€defendant€Crosby€moved€for€a€directed€verdict€as€toÐ `° Ðthe€assault€claim€and€the€outrageous€conduct€claim,€based€on€the€plaintiffððs€failure€to€prove€that€heÐ L œ Ðsuffered€serious€or€severe€emotional€injury€as€a€result€of€the€conduct€of€the€defendant.€€In€addition,Ð 8 ˆ Ðthe€defendant€moved€for€directed€verdict€on€the€lost€profits€claim€resulting€from€the€breach€ofÐ $ t Ðcontract€allegation€on€the€ground€that€the€proof€was€too€speculative€in€nature.€€The€court€granted€aÐ  ` Ðdirected€verdict€on€the€outrageous€conduct€claim€only,€and€the€proof€continued.€€At€the€close€of€allÐ ü L  Ðthe€proof,€the€plaintiff€moved€for€a€directed€verdict€as€to€the€breach€of€contract,€at€which€point€theÐ è 8  Ðfollowing€exchange€took€place:Ð Ô$  ÐÌà8  àà ` àTHE€COURT:€Defense€would€agree€that€there€was€an€assault€and€that€theÐ ¬ü  Ðcontract€was€breached,€and€itððs€just€a€matter€of€the€damages€of€the€damages€arisingÐ ˜è  Ðfrom€those€two€instances?Ð„Ô Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àMR.€CONGER:€Thatððs€right.Ð pÀ Ðà8  àà ` àTHE€COURT:€That€leaves€us€with€the€issues€just€of€the€assault,€the€amountÐ \¬ Ðof€damages,€and€contract€amount€of€damages.€€Gentlemen,€do€you€have€juryÐ H˜ Ðinstructions€that€you€request€the€Court€to€issue?€€I€have€a€list.Ð4„Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àMR.€CONGER:€Yes,€sir.Ð  p ÐÌà  àAfter€receiving€instructions€from€the€bench€the€jury€deliberated€on€the€issues€of€damagesÐ øH Ðresulting€from€the€breach€and€the€assault€and€rendered€the€following€verdict:Ð ä4 ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€jury€having€heard€the€evidence€and€arguments€of€counsel,€deliberated€andÐ ¼  Ðfound€as€follows:ШøÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à1.à ¸ àThe€assault€by€Joseph€Crosby€did€not€cause€injury€to€Carl€ShockleyÐ ”ä Ðfor€which€compensatory€damages€should€be€awarded;ЀÐÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à2.à ¸ àCarl€Shockley€should€be€awarded€$57,500.00€for€the€breach€ofÐ l¼ Ðcontract;€andÐX ¨Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à3.à ¸ àJoseph€Crosby€did€act€in€such€a€way€that€punitive€damages€should€beÐ D!” Ðawarded.Ð0"€ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àà ¸ àThe€Court,€after€hearing€arguments€of€counsel,€held€that€punitiveÐ #l! Ðdamages€could€not€be€awarded€in€that€the€jury€did€not€award€compensatory€damagesÐ $X" Ðfor€the€assault€and€found€that€the€facts€surrounding€the€breach€of€contract€did€not€fallÐ ô$D # Ðwithin€the€exceptions€allowing€punitive€damages€for€breach€of€contract:Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àà ¸ àIt€is,€therefore,€ORDERED,€ADJUDGED€AND€DECREED€thatÐ Ì&"% ÐJudgment€be€entered€in€favor€of€Carl€Shockley,€d/b/a€Shockley„Conner€Logging€andÐ ¸'#& ÐShockley€Logging€in€the€amount€of€$57,500.00.€€The€costs€are€assessed€against€theÐ ¤(ô#' ÐDefendants€Joseph€F.€Crosby€and€Opal€M.€Crosby€for€which€execution€may€issue€ifÐ )à$( Ðnecessary.Ð|*Ì%)Ð Ð  ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àOn€the€defendantððs€motion€for€a€remittitur€or€in€the€alternative€for€new€trial,€the€courtÐ ° Ðsuggested€a€remittitur€of€$7,500€finding€in€pertinent€part:Ð œì ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€issue€raised€in€paragraph€three€of€the€Defendantsðð€motion€is€well„taken.€Ð tÄ ÐIt€appears€from€the€transcript€that€under€the€original€contract€there€was€no€discussionÐ `° Ðabout€the€Plaintiff€being€required€to€use€a€cutter€to€remove€the€trees€from€theÐ L œ ÐDefendantsðð€property.€€It€was€the€Plaintiffððs€testimony€that€months€into€the€contractÐ 8 ˆ Ðthe€Defendant€requested€and/or€stated€that€the€Plaintiff€should€use€a€cutter€instead€ofÐ $ t Ða€chainsaw€to€remove€the€trees.€€Plaintiff€had€the€opportunity€at€that€point€to€seekÐ  ` Ðassistance€from€the€Court€if€he€felt€this€was€a€breach€of€the€original€contract.€Ð ü L  ÐHowever,€it€was€not€proven€that€the€Plaintiff€would€have€been€prohibited€fromÐ è 8  Ðlogging€the€trees€with€a€chainsaw,€although€that€appeared€to€be€the€DefendantsððÐ Ô$  Ðindication.€€It€is€unknown€whether€the€Defendants€would€have€allowed€the€PlaintiffÐ À  Ðto€complete€the€contract€with€chainsaws€as€he€had€begun.€€Therefore,€the€juryððsÐ ¬ü  Ðverdict€stands€as€rendered€with€the€exception€that€their€award€of€$57,500.00€to€theÐ ˜è  ÐPlaintiff€is€reduced€by€the€sum€of€$7,500.00,€for€a€total€award€of€$50,000.00.Ð„Ô Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€defendant€also€moved€for€a€new€trial€alleging€that€one€of€the€juror€members,€DonÐ \¬ ÐDeWayne€Shockley,€was€related€to€the€plaintiff€within€the€sixth€degree€and€thus€disqualified€to€actÐ H˜ Ðas€a€juror€pursuant€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€22„1„105.€€The€court€denied€this€portionÐ 4„ Ðof€the€defendantððs€motion€for€a€new€trial€holding€in€part:Ð  p ÐÌà8  àà ` àAs€to€the€issue€of€juror€Don€DeWayne€Shockleyððs€relationship€to€theÐ øH ÐPlaintiffððs€sister,€it€is€hereby€found€that:€(1)€this€Court€has€determined€that€the€jurorÐ ä4 Ðin€question€was€not€related€to€the€Plaintiff€within€the€sixth€degree€of€civil€kinship;Ð Ð  Ðand€(2)€even€if€the€party€was€within€the€sixth€degree€of€civil€kinship,€it€was€harmlessÐ ¼  Ðfor€juror€Shockley€to€sit€on€this€particular€trial.€€Therefore,€the€Defendantsðð€motionÐ ¨ø Ðfor€new€trial€on€the€grounds€set€out€in€paragraph€four€is€overruled.à  àДäÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àBoth€parties€appeal€the€order€of€the€trial€court€raising€separate€issues€on€appeal.€€AppellantÐ l¼ ÐCarl€Shockley€challenges€the€entry€of€the€directed€verdict€as€to€the€outrageous€conduct,€the€refusalÐ X ¨ Ðof€the€trial€court€to€allow€the€jury€to€consider€punitive€damages€for€assault,€the€refusal€of€the€trialÐ D!” Ðcourt€to€instruct€and€allow€the€jury€to€consider€punitive€damages€for€breach€of€contract,€and€the€orderÐ 0"€  Ðof€the€court€suggesting€a€remittitur€of€$7,500€on€the€defendantððs€motion.€€The€Cross„AppellantsÐ #l! ÐCrosby€€challenge€the€verdict€of€the€jury€as€contrary€to€the€weight€of€the€evidence.€€They€urge€onÐ $X" Ðappeal€that€the€plaintiffððs€proof€as€to€the€lost€profits€claim€is€too€speculative€and€remote€to€sustainÐ ô$D # Ðthe€jury€verdict.€€Cross„Appellants€also€argue€that€juror€Don€DeWayne€Shockley€was€related€to€theÐ à%0!$ Ðplaintiff€within€the€sixth€degree€by€marriage€under€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€22„1„105,€andÐ Ì&"% Ðthat€the€jurorððs€failure€to€disclose€his€relationship€and€the€courtððs€subsequent€failure€to€exclude€jurorÐ ¸'#& ÐShockley€operates€to€vitiate€the€juryððs€verdict.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌI.à  àOutrageous€ConductÐ |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àThe€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€has€held:Ð ° ÐÌà8  àà ` àAs€early€as€1888,€this€Court€conceded€that€the€bases€upon€which€it€permittedÐ ˆØ Ðclaims€for€emotional€distress€were€often€no€more€than€legal€fictions.€€òòSee€Wadsworthóó,Ð tÄ Ð8€S.W.€at€576.€€Nevertheless,€Tennesseeððs€common€law€retained€devices€includingÐ `° Ðð ðlegal€fictionsðð€and€requirements€of€physical€injury€to€distinguish€actions€based€onÐ L œ Ðemotional€distress.€€Consequently,€claims€for€purely€emotional€injuries€that€did€notÐ 8 ˆ Ðfit€within€traditional€causes€of€action€failed.€€òòSee,€e.g.,€Bowers€v.€Colonial€StagesÐ $ t ÐInterstate€Transit,€Inc.óó,€163€Tenn.€502,€43€S.W.2d€497€(1931),€òòmodified€by€CamperÐ  ` Ðv.€Minoróó,€915€S.W.2d€437€(Tenn.€1996);€òòMemphis€St.€Ry.€Co.€v.€Bernsteinóó,€137€Tenn.Ð ü L  Ð637,€194€S.W.902€(1917),€òòmodified€by€Camper€v.€Minoróó,€915€S.W.2d€437€(Tenn.Ð è 8  Ð1996);€òòKnoxville,€Cumberland€Gap€&€Louisville€R.R.€Co.€v.€Wyrickóó,€99€Tenn.€500,Ð Ô$  Ð42€S.W.€434€(1897);€òòAll€v.€John€Gerber€Co.óó,€36€Tenn.€App.€134,€252€S.W.2d€138Ð À  Ð(1952),€òòmodified€by€Camper€v.€Minoróó,€915€S.W.2d€437€(Tenn.€1996);€òòColsheróó,€19Ð ¬ü  ÐTenn.€App.€166,€84€S.W.2d€117.€€This€court€recognized€the€hardship€this€approachÐ ˜è  Ðcaused,€and€in€òòMedlin€v.€Allied€Investment€Co.óó,€217€Tenn.€469,€398€S.W.2d€270Ð „Ô  Ð(1966),€it€examined€ð ðwhether€the€law€recognizes€and€protects€a€right€to€emotionalÐ pÀ Ðtranquility€where€recovery€is€sought€for€mental€or€emotional€disturbance€alone.ðð€€òòId.óóÐ \¬ Ðat€273.€€In€the€context€of€intentional€conduct,€the€Court€concluded€that€a€plaintiffÐ H˜ Ðdoes€have€a€right€to€emotional€tranquility€that,€if€violated,€gives€rise€to€anÐ 4„ Ðindependent€cause€of€action€for€intentional€infliction€of€emotional€distress.€€òòSee€id.€óóÐ  p Ðat€273„74.Ð \Ð Ð  ÐÌà  à.€.€.€.Ð ä4 ÐÌà8  à[T]he€Court€in€òòMedlinóó€addressed€concerns€that€recognizing€a€cause€of€action€forÐ ¼  Ðintentional€infliction€of€emotional€distress€would€lead€to€a€host€of€trivial€claims.€€TheÐ ¨ø Ðsolution€to€these€concerns€was€found€in€the€requirements€of€section€46€of€theÐ ”ä ÐRestatement€(Second)€of€Torts,€which€provides:ЀÐÐ Ð  Ðà  àà8 ` àOne€who€by€extreme€and€outrageous€conduct€intentionally€orÐ l¼ Ðrecklessly€causes€severe€emotional€distress€to€another€is€subject€toÐ X ¨ Ðliability€for€such€emotional€distress,€and€if€bodily€harm€results€fromÐ D!” Ðit,€for€such€bodily€harm.Ð0"€ ` x` x Ðà8  àòòId.óó€at€274€(quoting€Restatement€(Second)€of€Torts€ðð€46(1)€(1965)).Ð#l!Ð Ð  Ðà8  àBy€grounding€the€cause€of€action€for€intentional€infliction€of€emotional€distressÐ $X" Ðwithin€the€Restatement€framework,€we€limited€recovery€to€those€plaintiffs€who€couldÐ ô$D # Ðsatisfy€its€requirements.€€In€òòBainóó,€we€had€the€occasion€to€clarify€the€requirements€toÐ à%0!$ Ðestablish€a€prima€facie€case€of€intentional€infliction€of€emotional€distress;€(1)€theÐ Ì&"% Ðconduct€complained€of€must€be€intentional€or€reckless;€(2)€the€conduct€must€be€soÐ ¸'#& Ðoutrageous€that€it€is€not€tolerated€by€civilized€society;€and€(3)€the€conduct€must€resultÐ ¤(ô#' Ðin€serious€mental€injury€to€the€plaintiff.€€òòSee€Bainóó,€936€S.W.2d€at€622.Ð)à$(Ð Ð  ÐÌòòMiller€v.€Willbanksóó,€8€S.W.3d€607,€611„12€(Tenn.€1999).Ð h+¸&* Їà  àThe€undisputed€proof€at€trial€shows€that€the€plaintiff€Carl€Shockley€did€not€seek€anyÐ ° Ðpsychiatric€treatment€of€any€kind,€nor€did€he€lose€any€sleep€from€the€incident.€€He€lost€no€work€otherÐ œì Ðthan€the€lost€work€as€a€result€of€the€breach.€€He€did€not€seek€medical€attention.€€The€sum€andÐ ˆØ Ðsubstance€of€his€testimony€was€that€upon€being€confronted€at€gun€point€he€was€ð ðkindly€weak„kneed.ðð€Ð tÄ ÐContrary€to€counselððs€statement€at€oral€argument€that€such€testimony€would€be€the€closest€anyoneÐ `° Ðfrom€Van€Buren€County€would€come€to€saying€ð ðthey€were€scared€to€death,ðð€Plaintiff€did€not€soÐ L œ Ðtestify€and€no€other€evidence€is€offered€that€would€militate€against€the€application€of€the€general€ruleÐ 8 ˆ Ðrelative€to€serious€mental€injury.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àAs€the€Supreme€Court€stated€in€òòMilleróó:Ð ü L  ÐÌà8  àOur€decision€today€merely€recognizes€that€in€most€cases€other€forms€of€proof€mayÐ Ô$  Ðalso€be€used€to€establish€a€claim€for€intentional€infliction€of€emotional€distress.€€SuchÐ À  Ðproof€may€include€a€claimantððs€own€testimony,€òòsee€Peeryóó,€897€P.2d€at€1191,€as€wellÐ ¬ü  Ðas€the€testimony€of€other€lay€witnesses€acquainted€with€the€claimant,€òòsee€Uebelackeróó,Ð ˜è  Ð549€N.E.2d€at€1220.€€Physical€manifestations€of€emotional€distress€may€also€serve€asÐ „Ô  Ðproof€of€serious€mental€injury.€€Moreover,€evidence€that€a€plaintiff€has€suffered€fromÐ pÀ Ðnightmares,€insomnia,€and€depression€or€has€sought€psychiatric€treatment€mayÐ \¬ Ðsupport€a€claim€of€a€serious€mental€injury.€€òòSee€Medlinóó,€398€S.W.2d€at€272;€òòJohnsonÐ H˜ Ðv.€Womanððs€Hospóó.,€527€S.W.2d€133,€140€(Tenn.Ct.App.€1975).€€The€intensity€andÐ 4„ Ðduration€of€the€mental€distress€are€also€factors€that€may€be€considered€in€determiningÐ  p Ðthe€severity€of€the€injury.€[FN4]Ð \Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àFN4.€€Although€the€plaintiff€is€generally€not€required€to€presentÐ øH Ðexpert€testimony€to€validate€the€existence€or€severity€of€a€mentalÐ ä4 Ðinjury,€we€emphasize€that€the€evidence€must€establish€that€theÐ Ð  Ðplaintiffððs€mental€injury€is€serious€or€severe.€€It€is€only€where€[theÐ ¼  Ðmental€injury]€is€extreme€that€the€liability€arises.€€Complete€emotionalÐ ¨ø Ðtranquility€is€seldom€attainable€in€this€world,€and€some€degree€ofÐ ”ä Ðtransient€and€trivial€emotional€distress€is€a€part€of€the€price€of€livingÐ €Ð Ðamong€people.€€The€law€intervenes€only€where€the€distress€is€soÐ l¼ Ðsevere€that€no€reasonable€[person]€could€be€expected€to€endure€it.€Ð X ¨ ÐRestatement€(Second)€of€Torts€ðð€46€cmt.€j€(1965).ÐD!”` x` x ЀÌòòMiller€v.€Willbanksóó,€8€S.W.3d€at€615.Ð #l! ÐÌà  àWhile€any€person€might€have€experienced€emotional€distress€if€placed€in€the€plaintiffððsÐ ô$D # Ðposition,€the€trial€court€was€presented€with€no€proof€of€severe€emotional€injury.€€Under€theÐ à%0!$ Ðcircumstances€the€directed€verdict€in€that€respect€is€affirmed.Ð Ì&"% ÐÌII.à  àPunitive€Damages€for€AssaultÐ ¤(ô#' Ðâ âÐ )à$( Ðà  àAppellantððs€second€issue€involves€the€trial€courtððs€refusal€to€submit€the€cause€for€bifurcatedÐ ° Ðconsideration€of€punitive€damages€pursuant€to€òòHodges€v.€S.C.€Toof€&€Co.óó,€833€S.W.2d€896€(Tenn.Ð œì Ð1992).Ð ˆØ Ðâ âÌà8  àà ` àIn€a€trial€where€punitive€damages€are€sought,€the€court,€upon€motion€ofÐ `° Ðdefendant,€shall€bifurcate€the€trial.€€During€the€first€phase,€the€factfinder€shallÐ L œ Ðdetermine€(1)€liability€for,€and€the€amount€of,€compensatory€damages€and€(2)€liabilityÐ 8 ˆ Ðfor€punitive€damages€in€accordance€with€the€standards€announced€above.€€During€thisÐ $ t Ðphase,€evidence€of€a€defendantððs€financial€affairs,€financial€condition,€or€net€worthÐ  ` Ðis€not€admissible.Ðü L Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àIf€the€factfinder€finds€a€defendant€liable€for€punitive€damages,€the€count€ofÐ è 8  Ðsuch€damages€shall€then€be€determined€in€an€immediate,€separate€proceeding.ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÌòòHodgesóó,€833€S.W.2d€at€901.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àAfter€its€deliberation€the€jury€specifically€found:Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  à1.à ` àThe€assault€by€Joseph€Crosby€did€not€cause€injury€to€Carl€Shockley€for€whichÐ \¬ Ðcompensatory€damages€should€be€awarded;Ð H˜ Ðà  à2.à ` àCarl€Shockley€should€be€awarded€$57,500.00€for€the€breach€of€contract;€andÐ 4„ Ðà  à3.à ` àJoseph€Crosby€did€act€in€such€a€way€that€punitive€damages€should€be€awarded.Ð  p ÐÌà  àThe€general€rule€followed€in€this€jurisdiction€was€enunciated€in€the€case€of€òòAllen€v.€Meltonóó,Ð øH Ð20€Tenn.€App.€387,€99€S.W.2d€219€(1936):Ð ä4 ÐÌà8  àà ` àIn€Tennessee,€and€in€a€large€majority€of€the€other€states€of€the€Union,Ð ¼  Ðexemplary,€or€punitive,€damages,€as€a€warning€to€other€wrongdoers€and€as€aÐ ¨ø Ðpunishment€to€the€defendant,€may€be€recovered€òòin€addition€to€compensatoryÐ ”ä Ðdamagesóó.€€Sedgwick€on€Damages€(9th.Ed.)€vol.€1,€ðð€360,€p.€706;€òòPolk€v.€Fancheróó,€1Ð €Ð ÐHead,€336,€340;€òòCox€v.€Crumleyóó,€5€Lea,€529,€533;€òòLouisville,€etc.,€R.R.€Co.€v.Ð l¼ ÐGuinanóó,€11€Lea,€98,€102,€47€Am.€Rep.€279;€òòHostetter€v.€Vadenóó,€13€Tenn.€App.€454,Ð X ¨ Ð456.ÐD!”Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àThe€soundness€of€the€doctrine€under€which€exemplary€damages€may€beÐ 0"€  Ðallowed€was€doubted€in€the€case€of€òòDougherty€v.€Shownóó,€1€Heisk,€302,€305,€306;€butÐ #l! Ðit€was€maintained€in€that€case€under€the€rule€of€stare€decisis,€and€it€has€since€beenÐ $X" Ðregarded€as€the€settled€law€of€this€state.€€See€cases€cited,€supra.Ðô$D #Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àBut€ð ðactual€damage€must€be€found€as€a€predicate€for€the€recovery€ofÐ à%0!$ Ðexemplary€damages.ðð€€Sutherland€on€Damages€(3d.Ed.)€vol.€2,€ðð€406,€p.€1129.ÐÌ&"%Ð Ð  ÐÌòòAllenóó,€20€Tenn.€App.€at€397,€99€S.W.2d€at€225.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àThe€rule€was€recently€reiterated€in€òòRoy€v.€Diamondóó,€16€S.W.3d€783,€791€(Tenn.Ct.App.Ð |*Ì%) Ð1999).€€Tennessee€follows€the€majority€rule€in€American€jurisdictions€that€actual€damages€must€beÐ h+¸&* Ðawarded€by€the€trier€of€fact€before€any€award€of€punitive€damages€can€be€made.€€The€marked€divisionÐ ° Ðof€authorities€among€the€states€is€recognized€by€Justice€Henry€in€òòWhittington€v.€Grand€Valley€Lakes,Ð œì ÐInc.óó,€547€S.W.2d€241,€243€(Tenn.€1977):òò€€óóÐ ˆØ ÐÌà8  àà ` àThis€rule€was€first€fully€developed€in€Tennessee€in€the€landmark€case€ofÐ `° ÐòòAllen,€et€al.€v.€Meltonóó,€20€Tenn.€App.€387,€99€S.W.2d€219€(1936),€wherein€the€lateÐ L œ ÐJudge€Faw,€with€characteristic€clarity,€discussed€the€matter€in€some€detail,€citingÐ 8 ˆ Ðnumerous€authorities€and€cases.€€This€general€rule€was€followed€in€òòLiberty€MutualÐ $ t ÐIns.€v.€Stevensonóó,€212€Tenn.€178,€368€S.W.2d€760€(1963),€wherein€the€Court€heldÐ  ` Ðthat€to€sustain€an€award€of€punitive€damages,€actual€damages€must€have€beenÐ ü L  Ðòòawarded.óóÐè 8 Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àIn€òòLazenby€v.€Universal€Underwriters€Insurance€Co.óó,€214€Tenn.€639,€383Ð Ô$  ÐS.W.2d€1€(1964)€the€Court€held€that€punitive€damages€are€allowed€only€after€anÐ À  Ðòòawardóó€of€compensatory€damages.Ьü Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àòòLazenbyóó€was€followed€by€the€Sixth€Circuit,€applying€Tennessee€law,€in€òòDillÐ ˜è  Ðv.€Greyhound€Corporationóó,€435€F.2d€231€(6th€Cir.€1970).Ð„Ô Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àThe€courts€of€Tennessee€appear€to€follow€the€majority€rule€although€a€smallÐ pÀ Ðnumber€of€jurisdictions€allow€punitive€damages€as€an€independent€basis€of€recovery,Ð \¬ Ðand€a€number€of€states€have€held€that€the€plaintiff€must€have€received€injuriesÐ H˜ Ðentitling€him€to€compensation,€although€no€actual€award€of€compensatory€damagesÐ 4„ Ðwere€made.€€A€substantial€number€of€jurisdictions€recognize€nominal€damages€as€aÐ  p Ðproper€predicate.€€See€Annotation,€17€A.L.R.2d€527,€actual€damages€as€a€necessaryÐ  \ Ðpredicate€of€punitive€damages.ÐøHÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àThe€underlying€consideration€seems€to€be€that€there€must€be€some€actual€lossÐ ä4 Ðsupported€by€proof.€€We€do€not€at€this€time€and€in€this€case€feel€any€need€to€alter,Ð Ð  Ðerode€or€modify€prior€Tennessee€case€law.€€Here,€actual€damages€were€clearlyÐ ¼  Ðdemonstrated.ШøÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` à.€.€.€.Ð €Ð ÐÌà8  àà ` àThere€is€proof€in€the€record€from€which€the€jury€might€have€found,€as€itÐ X ¨ Ðobviously€did,€that€Grand€Valley€Lakes€ran€rough„shod€over€rights€of€this€landownerÐ D!” Є€„€that€its€acts€were€in€knowing,€wilful€and€deliberate€disregard€of€her€property€rightsÐ 0"€  Ðand€that€Grand€Valley€should€therefore€pay€punitive€damages.Ð#l!Ð Ð  ÐÌòòWhittington€v.€Grand€Valley€Lakes,€Inc.óó,€547€S.W.2d€241,€243€(Tenn.€1977).Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àLiability€and€resulting€damages€are€distinct€elements€of€the€right€of€action€in€tort€and€withoutÐ Ì&"% Ðproof€of€both€elements€a€plaintiff€establishes€no€cause€of€action.€€òòSkoretz€v.€Cowdenóó,€707€S.W.2d€529Ð ¸'#& Ð(Tenn.Ct.App.€1985).€€Proof€of€all€of€the€elements€of€proximate€negligence€without€proof€that€isÐ ¤(ô#' Ðsatisfactory€to€the€trier€of€fact€that€the€plaintiff€has€suffered€some€damages€from€the€proximateÐ )à$( Ðnegligence€of€the€defendant€results€in€the€failure€of€the€plaintiffððs€alleged€cause€of€action€becauseÐ |*Ì%) Ðdamages€are€an€indispensable€element€of€a€tort€claim.€€òòMorris€v.€Stateóó,€21€S.W.3d€196,€203€(Tenn.€Ð h+¸&* ÐCt.App.€1999).׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð ° ÐÌà  àIn€this€case€Shockley€has€recovered€a€judgment€for€compensatory€damages€in€breach€ofÐ ˆØ Ðcontract.€€A€verdict€was€directed€for€him€on€the€issue€of€liability€in€tort€for€the€assault.€€The€case€wasÐ tÄ Ðthen€submitted€to€the€jury€under€proper€instructions€to€determine€damages€if€any€that€were€sufferedÐ `° Ðby€Shockley€as€a€result€of€the€assault.€€The€jury€returned€a€verdict€of€ð ð$0ðð€as€damages€for€the€assault.€Ð L œ ÐThe€trial€court€thereupon€quite€correctly€refused€to€submit€any€issue€of€punitive€damages€to€the€jury.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àA€clearly€analogous€case€applying€the€majority€rule€as€to€punitive€damages€is€òòBellefonteÐ  ` ÐUnderwriters€Ins.€Co.€v.€Brownóó,€704€S.W.2d€742€(Tex.€1986).€€In€that€case€plaintiff€sued€one€of€hisÐ ü L  Ðseven€insurors€for€breach€of€contract€relative€to€a€fire€loss.€€He€also€sued€this€insuror€for€tortiousÐ è 8  Ðinterference€with€other€contracts€of€insurance€alleging€damages€in€tort.€€The€jury€returned€a€verdictÐ Ô$  Ðfor€breach€of€contract€in€the€amount€of€$300,964.€€In€answer€to€the€interrogatory€relative€to€the€tortÐ À  Ðclaim€the€jury€made€specific€findings€of€fact€that€established€all€of€the€elements€of€tortiousÐ ¬ü  Ðinterference€except€for€actual€damages€and€as€to€that€interrogatory€the€jury€answered€ð ðnone.ðð€€ThenÐ ˜è  Ðwithout€specifying€whether€its€award€was€on€the€breach€of€contract€claim€or€the€tortious€interferenceÐ „Ô  Ðclaim€the€jury€awarded€$1,000,000€punitive€damages€against€the€defendant.€€On€appeal€the€Court€ofÐ pÀ ÐAppeals€of€Texas€acknowledged€that€the€punitive€damage€award€could€not€be€assessed€for€breachÐ \¬ Ðof€contract€but€that€in€spite€of€the€verdict€of€the€jury€awarding€no€actual€damages€the€punitiveÐ H˜ Ðdamage€award€could€be€upheld€on€the€tort€count€stating:Ð 4„ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à.€.€.€Brown€suffered€actual€damages€because€the€Telex€caused€at€leastÐ  \ Ðone€insurance€company€to€refuse€to€pay€his€claim€within€the€periodÐ øH Ðdesignated€in€the€policy,€thus€unnecessarily€delaying€the€payment€ofÐ ä4 Ðfunds€necessary€for€the€restart€of€his€business.€€Brown€was€forced€toÐ Ð  Ðsell€personal€property€and€raise€the€necessary€funds€by€other€means.м ` x` x Ðà  à663€S.W.2d€at€573.Ð ¨ø ÐÌ704€S.W.2d€at€744.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àThe€Supreme€Court€of€Texas€reversed€the€punitive€damage€award€holding:Ð X ¨ ÐÌà8  àà ` àComparing€the€above€quote€with€what€the€jury€actually€found€as€damagesÐ 0"€  Ðreveals€that€the€court€of€appeals€has€implied€a€finding€of€actual€damages€in€tort€notÐ #l! Ðmade€in€the€trial€court.€€The€only€actual€damages€found€by€the€jury€are€in€answer€toÐ $X" ÐSpecial€Issue€22(1)€and€relate€to€Brownððs€breach€of€contract€claim.€€The€jury€foundÐ ° Ðno€actual€damages€in€tort.€€In€answer€to€Special€Issue€22(2),€the€only€issue€bearingÐ œì Ðon€Brownððs€tort€claim,€the€jury€found€that€any€delay€in€the€payment€of€insuranceÐ ˆØ Ðproceeds€caused€Brown€no€loss€of€profits.€ÐtÄÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àFindings€of€fact€are€the€exclusive€province€of€the€jury€and/or€trial€court.€Ð `° ÐòòWisdom€v.€Smithóó,€146€Tex.€420,€209€S.W.2d€164,€166€(1948);€òòMooers€v.€RichardsonÐ L œ ÐPetroleum€Co.óó,€146€Tex.€174,€204€S.W.2d€606,€608€(1947).€€A€court€of€appealsÐ 8 ˆ Ðexceeds€its€authority€when€it€implies€a€finding€of€actual€damages€in€tort€because€aÐ $ t Ðcourt€of€appeals€cannot€make€original€findings€of€fact,€it€can€only€ð ðunfindðð€facts.€Ð  ` ÐòòCity€of€Beaumont€v.€Grahamóó,€441€S.W.2d€829,€832„33€(Tex.€1969).€€The€judgmentÐ ü L  Ðof€the€trial€court€confirms€that€no€finding€of€actual€damages€in€tort€was€made€in€theÐ è 8  Ðtrial€court.€€That€judgment€awards€actual€damages€of€only€$300,964,€the€amountÐ Ô$  Ðfound€by€the€jury€to€be€Brownððs€damages€for€breach€of€contract.ÐÀ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court,€however,€does€award€$1,000,000€as€punitiveÐ ¬ü  Ðdamages.€€Inclusion€of€punitive€damages€in€the€judgment€is€error€because€punitiveÐ ˜è  Ðdamages€are€not€recoverable€for€breach€of€contract.€€òòAmoco€Production€Co.€v.Ð „Ô  ÐAlexanderóó,€622€S.W.2d€563,€571€(Tex.€1981).€€In€a€proper€case,€punitive€damages€areÐ pÀ Ðrecoverable€when€the€action€is€one€in€tort,€but€as€a€predicate€to€recovery€the€plaintiffÐ \¬ Ðmust€show€that€he€has€suffered€actual€damages.€€òòDoubleday€&€Company,€Inc.€v.Ð H˜ ÐRogersóó,€674€S.W.2d€751,€753„54€(Tex.€1984).Ð4„Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àBrown€argues€that€the€present€case€is€an€exception€to€the€above€rules€becauseÐ  p Ðit€involves€claims€both€in€contract€and€in€tort.€He€contends€that€a€plaintiff€mayÐ  \ Ðrecover€punitive€damages€in€addition€to€contact€damages€when€a€distinct,€willful€tortÐ øH Ðis€alleged€and€proved€along€with€the€contract€action.€€In€such€a€case,€BrownÐ ä4 Ðconcludes,€actual€damages€in€tort€are€no€longer€a€predicate€to€punitive€damages€soÐ Ð  Ðlong€as€the€plaintiff€has€suffered€some€damages€as€a€result€of€the€breach€of€contract.м Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àIn€making€this€argument€Brown€misinterprets€several€cases,€the€most€recentÐ ¨ø Ðof€which€is€òòCity€Products€Corp.€v.€Bermanóó,€610€S.W.2d€446€(Tex.€1980).€€In€òòBermanóóÐ ”ä Ðwe€said:ЀÐÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àWhen€a€distinct,€willful€tort€is€alleged€and€proved€in€connection€withÐ l¼ Ða€suit€upon€a€contract,€one€may€recover€punitive€damages,€but€evenÐ X ¨ Ðin€that€instance€the€complainant€must€prove€that€he€suffered€someÐ D!” Ðactual€damages.Ð0"€ ` x` x Ðà8  àòòId.óó€at€450.€€The€joinder€of€a€claim€in€contract€with€a€claim€in€tort€does€not€alter€theÐ #l! Ðbasic€principles:€punitive€damages€are€not€awarded€for€breach€of€contract,€òòAmocoÐ $X" ÐProduction€Co.€v.€Alexanderóó,€622€S.W.2d€563,€571;€the€award€of€damages€in€tort€isÐ ô$D # Ða€prerequisite€to€recovery€of€punitive€damages.€€òòDoubleday€&€Company,€Inc.€v.Ð à%0!$ ÐRogersóó,€674€S.W.2d€751,€753„564.ÐÌ&"%Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àThe€above€statement€from€òòBermanóó€does€not€create€an€exception€to€the€generalÐ ¸'#& Ðrules€nor€does€it€support€Brownððs€contentions.€€Because€Brown€failed€to€obtain€aÐ ¤(ô#' Ðfinding€of€damages€in€tort,€he€failed€to€establish€all€necessary€elements€of€his€claimÐ )à$( Ðfor€tortious€interference€with€contract.€€Brown€is€not€entitled€to€the€award€of€punitiveÐ |*Ì%) Ðdamages€because€he€failed€to€prove€he€suffered€any€actual€damages€in€tort.Ðh+¸&*Ð Ð  ЇòòBellefonte€Underwriters€Ins.€Co.€v.€Brownóó,€704€S.W.2d€742,€744„45€(Tex.€1986).Ð ° ÐÌà  àIn€the€instant€case€we€face€the€curious€situation€where€the€assault€on€Shockley€was€all€butÐ ˆØ Ðstipulated:Ð tÄ ÐÌà8  àà ` àTHE€COURT:€Defense€would€agree€that€there€was€an€assault€and€that€theÐ L œ Ðcontract€was€breached,€and€itððs€just€a€matter€of€the€damages€of€the€damages€arisingÐ 8 ˆ Ðfrom€those€two€instances?Ð$ tÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àMR.€CONGER:€Thatððs€right.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àAfter€hearing€the€proof,€the€jury€returned€a€verdict€specifically€denying€compensatoryÐ è 8  Ðdamages€but€awarding€punitive€damages.€€Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àUnder€the€rule€in€òòAllen,€Whittington,€Emerson€v.€Garneróó,€732€S.W.2d€613€(Tenn.Ct.App.Ð ¬ü  Ð1987),€and€òòBeaty€v.€McGrawóó,€15€S.W.3d€819,€830€(Tenn.Ct.App.€1998),€the€trial€court€was€correctÐ ˜è  Ðin€finding€that€there€was€no€basis€to€submit€the€punitive€damages€issue€to€the€jury.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà0  àà ° àIII.à  àThe€Trial€Courtððs€Refusal€to€Consider€or€Instruct€the€Jury€Concerning€Punitive€Damages€forÐ \¬ ÐBreach€of€ContractÐH˜(#(# ÐÌà  àIn€the€rarefied€atmosphere€of€appellate€chambers€and€with€the€benefit€of€unerring€hindsightÐ  p Ðit€is€easy€to€see€where€this€entire€punitive€damages€issue€got€derailed€in€the€trial€court.€€The€front€lineÐ  \ Ðtroops€under€the€gun€in€the€trial€court€do€not€enjoy€the€same€luxury.€€The€verdict€form€used€did€notÐ øH Ðdistinguish€between€punitive€damages€based€upon€tort€and€punitive€damages€based€upon€breach€ofÐ ä4 Ðcontract.€€It€simply€allowed€the€jury€to€say€after€finding€that€no€compensatory€damages€should€beÐ Ð  Ðawarded€for€the€assault€and€that€Shockley€should€receive€$57,500€damages€for€the€breach€of€contract:Ð ¼  Ðð ð(3)€Joseph€Crosby€did€act€in€such€a€way€that€punitive€damages€should€be€awarded.ððÐ ¨ø ÐÌà  àIt€became€evident€that€the€jury€was€having€problems€when€they€twice€sent€questions€from€theÐ €Ð Ðjury€room€indicating€their€difficulties.€€Relative€to€the€first€inquiry€from€the€jury€the€record€indicates:€Ð l¼ ÐÌÌà8  àà ` àTHE€COURT:€Gentlemen,€we€have€a€written€question€here€from€the€jury.€Ð 0"€  ÐNumber€one,€what€is€the€difference€between€compensatory€damages€and€punitiveÐ #l! Ðdamages?€€I€think€if€we€give€them€the€verdict€form€„€„€or€not€the€verdict€form,€but€theÐ $X" Ðinstruction,€that€may€clarify,€and€I€will€pull€out€those€two,€what€compensatoryÐ ô$D # Ðdamages€are€and€what€punitive€damages€are,€and€send€them€back€and€see€if€it€helpsÐ à%0!$ Ðthem.ÐÌ&"%Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àAnd€the€question€is:€Do€we€decide€how€much€to€award€for€the€assault,€or€doesÐ ¸'#& Ðthe€Judge€award€it?€€I€think€that€can€be€simply€answered.€€If€they€find€in€No.€4,€thatÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthe€assault€„€„€the€question€is€by€Joseph€Crosby€cause€injury€to€Carl€Shockley€forÐ )à$( Ðwhich€compensatory€damages€should€be€awarded.€€If€they€find€yes,€then€they€are€toÐ |*Ì%) Ðmake€that€determination,€correct?€[sic]Ðh+¸&*Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àMR.€MILLS:à  àYes.Ð ° ÐÌà  àAs€to€the€second€jury€question€the€record€discloses:Ð ˆØ ÐÌà8  àà ` àTHE€COURT:€Ladies€and€gentlemen,€we€have€another€question€from€the€jury.€Ð `° ÐIs€this€the€question€they€wrote€down?ÐL œÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àCOURT€OFFICER:€Yes,€sir.Ð 8 ˆ Ðà8  àà ` àTHE€COURT:€The€question€is:€Who€assesses€amount€for€punitive€damages?€Ð $ t ÐAnd€that€will€simply€be€„€„€the€response€that€you€should€give€them€is€that€they€are€notÐ  ` Ðto€address€that€question.€€At€this€time€they€are€only€to€address€the€question€of€whetherÐ ü L  Ðpunitive€damages€are€appropriate€based€on€the€instruction€given.€€Any€problem€withÐ è 8  Ðthat,€gentlemen?ÐÔ$ Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àMR.€CONGER:€No,€sir.Ð À  ÐÌà  àThereafter€the€jury€returned€to€announce€its€verdict€whereupon€the€following€occurred:Ð ˜è  ÐÌà8  àà ` àGentlemen,€in€the€jury€verdict€form,€we,€the€jury,€unanimously€find€asÐ pÀ Ðfollows:€Did€the€assault€by€Joseph€Crosby€cause€injury€to€Carl€Shockley€for€whichÐ \¬ Ðcompensatory€damages€should€be€awarded?€€The€answer€is€no.€€We€award€theÐ H˜ Ðfollowing€damages:€Breach€of€contract,€$57,500;€the€assault€is€left€blank.€€I€assumeÐ 4„ Ðthat€is€to€be€zero;€is€that€correct,€sir?€€You€found€that€there€was€„€„Ð pÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àFOREPERSON:€The€top€one?Ð  \ Ðà8  àà ` àTHE€COURT:€Yes.€€No€compensatory€damages€should€be€awarded€for€theÐ øH Ðassault,€and€the€assault€compensatory€is€left€blank,€which€would€indicate€an€awardÐ ä4 Ðof€zero.€€If€you€awarded€damages,€answer€the€next€question.€€If€you€did€not€awardÐ Ð  Ðdamages,€sign€the€verdict€form.м Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àNo.€6:€Did€Joseph€Crosby€act€in€such€a€way€that€punitive€damages€should€beÐ ¨ø Ðawarded?€€The€answer,€yes,€is€checked,€dated€10„8„02,€Dolphin€H.€Mosely.€€Is€thisÐ ”ä Ðverdict€agreed€by€all€of€you?€€If€so,€would€you€indicate€by€raising€your€right€hand?ЀÐÐ Ð  Ðà8  à(Whereupon€all€jurors€raised€right€hands€with€no€dissenting€votes)Ðl¼Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àTHE€COURT:€All€right.€€Ms.€Reporter,€let€the€record€indicate€that€eachÐ X ¨ Ðmember€has€raised€their€hands.€€Gentlemen,€I€think€at€this€point€we€probably€need€aÐ D!” Ðhearing€outside€the€jury,€correct?Ð0"€ Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€jury€at€this€point€was€asked€to€return€to€the€jury€room€and€the€problem€with€the€juryððsÐ $X" Ðresponses€became€evident€to€the€trial€court€and€the€attorneys€with€counsel€for€the€plaintiff€observing:Ð ô$D # ÐÌà8  àà ` àMR.€MILLS:€I€guess€after€this€many€years€you€start€wondering,€all€right,€ifÐ Ì&"% ÐMurphyððs€law€could€kick€in€and€answer€one€thing€one€way€and€one€the€other,€whatÐ ¸'#& Ðdoes€that€mean.Ф(ô#'Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àTHE€COURT:€Yeah.€€It€can€happen€and€will,€as€it€just€did.Ð)à$(Ð Ð  Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà  àThe€trial€court€and€counsel€then€struggled€at€length€with€the€question€of€punitive€damagesÐ ° Ðâ âfor€breach€of€contract€with€the€trial€court€ultimately€finding€that€punitive€damages€could€not€beÐ œì Ðsupported€on€the€breach€of€contract€issue€because€of€fraud,€malice,€gross€negligence,€or€oppressionÐ ˆØ Ðas€those€elements€are€discussed€in€òòMedley€v.€Chesterton€Co.óó,€912€S.W.2d€748€(Tenn.Ct.App.€1995).€Ð tÄ ÐThe€trial€court€thereupon€declined€to€allow€the€jury€to€proceed€with€the€second€part€of€the€bifurcatedÐ `° Ðhearing€as€to€punitive€damages€required€by€òòHodges€v.€Toofóó,€833€S.W.2d€896€)€(Tenn.€1992)€stating:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àà ` àIððm€going€to€rule€that€the€punitive€damages€cannot€be€awarded€because€thereÐ $ t Ðwas€no€award€for€compensatory€damages€in€the€assault€case;€and€that€the€standardÐ  ` Ðrule€that€no€punitive€damages€are€awarded€in€a€contract€case€applies€here€in€theÐ ü L  Ðexceptions,€and€the€Court€does€not€find€that€the€exceptions€be€found€by€a€fact€finder,Ð è 8  Ðin€this€case,€the€jury.à  àÐÔ$ Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€thereupon€observed€with€the€unerring€accuracy€of€wisdom€born€after€the€fact:Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà8  àà ` àTHE€COURT:€Yes.€€I€think€they€reached€an€„€„€I€wonððt€call€it€inaccurate,€butÐ „Ô  Ðthey€reached€a€conclusion€„€„€and€itððs€probably€our€fault€between€the€three€of€us.€€TheÐ pÀ Ðverdict€form€that€was€provided€did€a€good€job,€but€it€only€said€if€you€awardedÐ \¬ Ðdamages,€and€probably€should€have€said€if€you€awarded€damages€for€the€assault,Ð H˜ Ðanswer€the€next€question.€€Or€we€could€have€resolved€this€issue€ahead€of€time€aboutÐ 4„ Ðthe€breach€of€contract€needing€to€involve€fraud,€malice,€gross€negligence,€orÐ  p Ðoppression.€€Ð \Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àConsidering€this€record€in€its€entirety€nothing€that€the€jury€ever€heard€could€have€put€themÐ ä4 Ðon€notice€that€they€were€being€called€upon€to€determine€an€issue€of€punitive€damages€based€uponÐ Ð  Ðbreach€of€contract.€€Doubtless€after€the€trial€court€had€directed€the€jury€to€find€for€the€plaintiff€on€theÐ ¼  Ðassault€count€of€the€complaint,€neither€the€trial€court€nor€trial€counsel€envisioned€the€jury€returningÐ ¨ø Ða€verdict€for€no€damages€on€the€assault€count.€€There€is€further€no€indication€in€the€record€thatÐ ”ä Ðanybody€ever€contemplated€punitive€damages€on€the€breach€of€contract€count€of€the€complaint.€€TheÐ €Ð Ðplaintiff€did€not€ask€for€punitive€damages€on€the€first€count€of€the€complaint€which€was€the€portionÐ l¼ Ðof€the€complaint€asserting€breach€of€contract.€€This€count€of€the€complaint€asserts€in€part:Ð X ¨ ÐÌà8  àà ` à8.à ¸ àPursuant€to€the€contract,€Joseph€Crosby€and€Opal€Crosby€mustÐ 0"€  Ðindemnify€Carl€Shockley€for€losses€sustained€by€him€as€a€result€of€breach€of€theÐ #l! Ðcontract.Ð$X"Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à9.à ¸ àCarl€Shockley€has€duly€performed€his€duties€under€the€terms€andÐ ô$D # Ðconditions€of€the€contract,€and€in€fact,€has€exceeded€those€requirements€in€theÐ à%0!$ Ðcontract.€€Carl€Shockley€has€performed€the€terms€and€conditions€of€the€contract€upÐ Ì&"% Ðuntil€the€point€Joseph€Crosby€terminated€the€contract€at€gunpoint.€€For€the€reasonsÐ ¸'#& Ðforegoing,€Carl€Shockley€has€been€damaged€in€the€sum€of€at€least€$125,000.00€in€lostÐ ¤(ô#' Ðprofits,€plus€the€cost€and€expenses€incurred€as€a€result€of€inability€to€make€paymentsÐ )à$( Ðon€equipment€rented€and€purchased€specifically€for€this€contract,€in€an€amount€as€yetÐ |*Ì%) Ðto€be€determined.Ðh+¸&*Ð Ð  Їà  àOnly€count€II€of€the€complaint€charging€ð ðassault€and€outrageous€conductðð€asserts€a€claim€forÐ ° Ðpunitive€damages.€€In€the€ð ðprayer€for€reliefðð€of€the€complaint€Plaintiff€asserts:€ð ðPlaintiff€CarlÐ œì ÐShockley€demands€judgment€against€Joseph€Crosby€for€compensatory€damages€in€an€amount€not€lessÐ ˆØ Ðthan€$10,000.00€and€an€amount€not€less€than€$50,000.00€punitive€damages€for€assault€andÐ tÄ Ðoutrageous€conduct.ððÐ `° ÐÌà  àThe€charge€to€the€jury€on€punitive€damages€is€couched€entirely€in€terms€of€tort€liabilityÐ 8 ˆ Ðreferring€only€to€fault,€wrongdoing,€gross€deviation€from€the€standard€of€care,€and€injury.€€ThisÐ $ t Ðportion€of€the€charge€in€its€entirety€states:Ð  ` ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€plaintiff€has€also€asked€that€you€make€an€award€of€punitive€damages,€butÐ è 8  Ðthis€award€may€only€be€made€under€the€following€circumstances:€You€may€considerÐ Ô$  Ðan€award€of€punitive€damages€only€if€you€find€that€the€plaintiff€has€suffered€actualÐ À  Ðdamages€as€a€legal€result€of€the€defendantððs€fault€and€you€have€made€an€award€forÐ ¬ü  Ðcompensatory€damages.€€The€purpose€of€punitive€damages€is€not€to€furtherÐ ˜è  Ðcompensate€the€plaintiff,€but€to€punish€a€wrongdoer€and€deter€others€fromÐ „Ô  Ðcommitting€similar€wrongs€in€the€future.ÐpÀÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àPunitive€damages€may€be€considered€if,€and€only€if,€the€plaintiff€has€shownÐ \¬ Ðby€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€a€defendant€has€acted€either€intentionally,Ð H˜ Ðrecklessly,€maliciously,€or€fraudulently.€€Clear€and€convincing€evidence€is€a€differentÐ 4„ Ðand€higher€standard€than€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€€It€means€that€theÐ  p Ðdefendantððs€wrong,€if€any,€must€be€so€clearly€shown,€that€there€is€no€serious€orÐ  \ Ðsubstantial€doubt€about€the€correctness€of€the€conclusions€drawn€from€the€evidence.€Ð øH Ðà ` àA€person€is€acting€intentionally€when€it€is€the€personððs€purpose€or€desire€toÐ ä4 Ðdo€a€wrongful€act€or€to€cause€the€result.€€A€person€acts€recklessly€when€the€person€isÐ Ð  Ðaware€of,€but€consciously€disregards€a€substantial€and€unjustifiable€risk€of€injury€orÐ ¼  Ðdamage€to€another.€€Disregarding€the€risk€must€be€a€gross€deviation€from€the€standardÐ ¨ø Ðof€care€that€an€ordinary€person€would€use€under€all€of€the€circumstances.€€A€personÐ ”ä Ðacts€maliciously€when€the€person€is€motivated€by€ill€will,€hatred,€or€personal€spite.€Ð €Ð ÐA€person€acts€fraudulently€when€the€person€intentionally€either€misrepresents€anÐ l¼ Ðexisting€material€fact€or€causes€a€false€impression€of€an€existing€material€fact€toÐ X ¨ Ðmislead€or€to€obtain€an€unfair€or€undue€advantage,€and€another€person€suffers€injuryÐ D!” Ðor€loss€because€of€the€reasonable€reliance€upon€that€representation.Ð0"€ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àIf€you€decide€to€award€punitive€damages,€you€will€not€assess€an€amount€ofÐ #l! Ðpunitive€damages€at€this€time.€€You€will,€however,€report€your€finding€to€the€CourtÐ $X" Ðon€the€jury€verdict€form.Ðô$D #Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àOne€may€search€this€record,€technical€and€testimonial,€in€vain€for€the€slightest€indication€thatÐ Ì&"% Ðanyone€ever€contemplated€an€issue€of€punitive€damages€based€upon€breach€of€contract€prior€to€theÐ ¸'#& Ðapparently€stunning€verdict€of€the€jury€triggering€Murphyððs€law.€€These€remarks€should€be€in€no€wayÐ ¤(ô#' Ðâ âconstrued€as€critical€of€either€the€trial€court€or€counsel,€all€of€whom€were€taken€aback€by€a€totallyÐ )à$( Ðunexpected€verdict.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€pleadings€of€the€parties€did€not€contemplate€such€issue.€€Counsel€for€theÐ ° Ðâ âplaintiff€in€closing€argument€negates€such€an€issue€and,€after€discussing€breach€of€contract€damagesÐ œì Ðalleged€to€be€$127,500€in€conformity€with€his€allegations€in€count€one€of€the€complaint€relative€toÐ ˆØ Ðbreach€of€contract,€addresses€the€case€for€punitive€damages€solely€on€the€assault€count€of€theÐ tÄ Ðcomplaint€wherein€he€has€sought€$10,000€compensatory€damages€and€$50,000€in€punitive€damages.€Ð `° ÐÌà8  àà ` àNow,€thereððs€another€part€of€the€lawsuit€that€I€told€you€about,€and€thatððs€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðassault,€and€the€Judge€has€already€ruled€that€there€was€an€assault.€€And€there€was€aÐ $ t Ðwhole€lot€of€hay€made€about€whether€the€gun€was€here€or€here€or€here€on€Mr.Ð  ` ÐCrosbyððs€arm.€€I€couldnððt€have€told€you€where€the€gun€was.€€All€I€would€have€seenÐ ü L  Ðis€the€barrel€of€that€gun€if€I€had€been€on€the€other€end€of€it.Ðè 8 Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àAnd€Mr.€Shockley€didnððt€want€to€say€what€he€felt€like,€but€he€finally€said,€IÐ Ô$  Ðkind€of€felt€weak€kneed.€€I€asked€everybody€in€the€jury€panel€if€you€ever€had€a€gunÐ À  Ðpointed€at€you,€and€everybody€said€no.€€I€never€have€either.€€I€hope€I€never€do.€€ButÐ ¬ü  ÐI€put€it€to€you€that€that€does€scare€you,€and€it€does€cause€you€a€little€anxiousness,Ð ˜è  Ðbecause€hereððs€a€man€that€everybody€described€as€frightened.€.€.€.Ð„Ô Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àNow,€Iððm€not€here€„€„€and€theyððre€going€to€make€a€big€deal€out€of€me€suingÐ pÀ Ðfor€$60,000.€€Iððm€not€telling€you€itððs€worth€$60,000.€€What€I€am€telling€you€is€whatÐ \¬ Ðwe€sued€for€„€„€up€to€$10,000€for€pointing€a€gun,€having€a€gun€pointed€at€him.€€I€donððtÐ H˜ Ðknow€what€I€would€take€to€have€somebody€point€a€gun€at€me.€€It€wouldnððt€be€$100.€Ð 4„ ÐIt€wouldnððt€be€$500.€€It€wouldnððt€be€$1,000.€€I€guess€if€I€knew€they€wouldnððt€shootÐ  p Ðme,€I€would€be€getting€close€somewhere€in€there,€but€he€didnððt€know€if€he€was€goingÐ  \ Ðto€get€shot.€€But€itððs€up€to€you,€and€the€Judge€will€tell€you€thereððs€no€mathematicalÐ øH Ðformula€to€figure€that.€€Itððs€just€up€to€your€common€sense,€what€you€think€is€fair€forÐ ä4 Ðwhat€you€go€through€when€somebody€points€a€gun€at€you.ÐÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àAnd€then€thereððs€one€more€question,€and€the€Judge€will€give€you€a€verdictÐ ¼  Ðform€to€fill€out.€€Youððll€have€to€answer€these€questions.€€And€it€says:€Did€Mr.€CrosbyÐ ¨ø Ðact€in€such€a€way€that€you€think€he€ought€to€be€punished,€that€punitive€damagesÐ ”ä Ðshould€be€awarded.€€And€thatððs€the€assault€issue.€€And€Iððm€going€to€ask€you€to€answerÐ €Ð Ðthat€question€yes,€not€to€compensate€Mr.€Shockley,€but€to€stop€Mr.€Crosby€from€everÐ l¼ Ðpointing€another€gun€at€anybody€else,€from€ever€breaching€another€contract,€not€byÐ X ¨ Ðwriting€a€letter€to€the€lawyer€or€calling€your€lawyer€and€have€him€call€somebodyÐ D!” Ðelseððs€lawyer,€but€at€the€point€of€a€gun,€behind€a€truck,€holding€a€shotgun€onÐ 0"€  Ðsomebody.€€If€anything€in€2002,€in€Spencer,€Tennessee,€warrants€somebody€beingÐ #l! Ðpunished,€itððs€that.Ð$X"Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àAnd€if€you€award€damages€for€the€assault,€for€the€compensatory€damages€ofÐ ô$D # Ðthe€assault,€for€the€fear,€and€you€say€that,€yes,€weððre€going€to€have€to€award€someÐ à%0!$ Ðpunitive€damages,€we€will€address€that€issue.€€Thatððs€up€to€you.€€And€thatððs€almostÐ Ì&"% Ðan€issue€of€what€you€want€your€community€to€be€like,€what€you€think€it€stands€forÐ ° Ðand€how€you€want€things€done€these€days.€€I€said€that€when€I€started,€this€is€notÐ œì ÐDodge€City€in€1870,€this€is€not€Chicago€in€1920,€and,€by€George,€nobody€ought€to€beÐ ˆØ Ðpointing€guns€at€anybody,€not€in€2002.ÐtÄÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àNow,€Mr.€Conger€gets€to€get€up€here.€€I€wish€he€would€explain€to€you€whyÐ `° ÐMr.€Crosby€didnððt€testify,€but€he€doesnððt€have€to,€but€he€doesnððt€have€to.€€But€explainÐ L œ Ðwhy€pointing€a€gun€at€somebody€doesnððt€warrant€some€damages,€doesnððt€warrantÐ 8 ˆ Ðsome€punishment.€€We€think€it€does.Ð$ tÐ Ð  Ðà  àÌà  àUnder€these€circumstances€it€is€difficult€to€see€how€any€issue€of€punitive€damages€based€uponÐ ü L  Ðbreach€of€contract€was€tried€by€implied€consent€under€T.R.C.P.€15.02€since€such€issue€never€aroseÐ è 8  Ðin€the€case€until€after€the€verdict€of€the€jury€was€in.€€òòSee€Hiller€v.€Haileyóó,€915€S.W.2d€800Ð Ô$  Ð(Tenn.Ct.App.€1995).Ð À  ÐÌà  àThe€question€of€punitive€damages€based€upon€breach€of€contract€is€not€within€the€scope€ofÐ ˜è  Ðthe€issues€drawn€by€the€pleadings.€€If€the€issue€is€to€be€within€the€scope€of€the€triable€issues€in€theÐ „Ô  Ðcase€it€must€appear€that€the€issue€was€tried€by€implied€consent€within€the€meaning€of€T.R.C.P.€15.02.€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àIn€òòMcLemore€v.€Powellóó,€968€S.W.2d€799€(Tenn.App.€1997)€the€pleadings€did€not€encompassÐ H˜ Ðan€issue€of€breach€of€contract.€€In€discussing€trial€by€implied€consent€this€court€stated:Ð 4„ ÐÌà8  àà ` àBecause€the€case€went€to€trial€despite€the€fact€that€pleadings€did€notÐ  \ Ðencompass€a€cause€of€action€for€breach€of€contract,€we€must€determine€whether€thisÐ øH Ðissue€was€tried€by€the€implied€consent€of€the€parties€under€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€15.02.€€TheÐ ä4 ÐRule€reads€in€pertinent€part€as€follows:ÐÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àWhen€issues€not€raised€by€the€pleadings€are€tried€by€express€orÐ ¼  Ðimplied€consent€of€the€parties,€they€shall€be€treated€in€all€respects€asÐ ¨ø Ðif€they€had€been€raised€in€the€pleadings.€€Such€amendment€of€theÐ ”ä Ðpleadings€as€may€be€necessary€to€cause€them€to€conform€to€theÐ €Ð Ðevidence€and€to€raise€these€issues€may€be€made€upon€motion€of€anyÐ l¼ Ðparty€at€any€time,€even€after€judgment;€but€failure€so€to€amend€doesÐ X ¨ Ðnot€affect€the€result€of€the€trial€of€these€issues.ÐD!”` x` x Ðà8  àTenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€15.02.€€Implied€consent€hinges€on€the€issues€that€were€actuallyÐ 0"€  Ðlitigated€by€the€parties,€and€the€failure€to€amend€or€to€request€to€amend€is€notÐ #l! Ðdispositive.€€òòZach€Cheek€Builders,€Inc.€v.€McLeodóó,€597€S.W.2d€888,€890€(Tenn.Ð $X" Ð1980).Ðô$D #Ð Ð  ÐÌ968€S.W.2d€799€at€803.Ð Ì&"% ЀÌà  àIn€order€to€find€trial€of€an€issue€by€implied€consent€the€court€must€find€that€the€evidenceÐ ¤(ô#' Ðintroduced€at€trial€on€such€unpleaded€issue€falls€outside€the€scope€of€the€issues€drawn€by€theÐ )à$( Ðpleadings.€€In€finding€that€breach€of€contract€was€not€tried€by€implied€consent€in€òòMcLemoreóó,€JudgeÐ |*Ì%) ÐCrawford€held:Ð h+¸&* Їà8  àà ` àAdditionally,€the€evidence€introduced€at€trial€on€the€contract€for€the€purchaseÐ ° Ðof€cattle€did€not€fall€outside€the€scope€of€the€issues€raised€by€the€pleadings€so€as€toÐ œì Ðconstitute€implied€consent€to€the€trial€of€a€separate€claim€for€breach€of€contract.€€TheÐ ˆØ Ðsurrounding€circumstances,€including€the€evidence€as€to€whether€Nelson€was€actingÐ tÄ Ðas€Powellððs€agent€when€he€entered€into€the€alleged€contract,€were€relevant€to€the€issueÐ `° Ðof€whether€Nelson€was€acting€as€Powellððs€agent€when€he€executed€the€promissoryÐ L œ Ðnote.€€Because€the€evidence€concerning€the€contract€was€relevant€to€the€claim€on€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðpromissory€note,€it€cannot€be€said€that€a€separate€breach€of€contract€claim€was€triedÐ $ t Ðby€the€implied€consent€of€the€parties.Ð `Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àUnder€the€principles€above,€we€cannot€say€that€the€issue€of€the€breach€ofÐ ü L  Ðcontract€was€tried€by€the€implied€consent€of€the€parties.Ðè 8 Ð Ð  ÐÌòòMcLemore€v.€Powellóó,€968€S.W.2d€799,€804€(Tenn.Ct.App.€1997).Ð À  ÐÌà  àThe€stated€rule€is€a€rule€of€general€application€in€other€jurisdictions.€€òòRaimi€v.€Furlongóó,€702Ð ˜è  ÐSo.2d€1273€(Fl.Dist.Ct.App.€1997)€(review€denied€717€So.2d€531€(Fla.€1998));€òòColeman€v.€Mantiaóó,Ð „Ô  Ð25€S.W.3d€675€(Mo.Ct.App.€2000);€òòMuir€v.€Raderóó,€945€S.W.2d€33€(Mo.Ct.App.€1997);€òòTormaschyÐ pÀ Ðv.€Tormaschyóó,€559€N.W.2d€813€(N.D.€1997);€òòJohnston€v.€McKinney€America,€Inc.óó,€9€S.W.3d€271Ð \¬ Ð(Tex.Ct.App.€1999).Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àIn€òòMembers€Interior€Constr.€v.€Leader€Constr.óó,€the€Court€of€Appeals€of€North€CarolinaÐ  p Ðaddressed€the€issue€when,€after€the€close€of€its€case€in€chief,€Plaintiff€attempted€to€amend€itsððÐ  \ Ðcomplaint€under€N.C.R.€Civ.€P.€15(b)€to€allege€a€statutory€violation€not€previously€pleaded.€€SinceÐ øH Ðthe€evidence€introduced€by€Plaintiffs€also€supported€the€plaintiffððs€properly€pleaded€breach€ofÐ ä4 Ðcontract€action,€the€court€refused€to€allow€the€proffered€amendment€and€declined€to€consider€theÐ Ð  Ðstatutory€violation:Ð ¼  ÐÌà8  àà ` àWhen,€as€here,€evidence€is€introduced€without€objection,€a€Rule€15(b)€motionÐ ”ä Ðshould€be€granted€only€if€the€parties€understand€the€evidence€is€aimed€at€an€issue€notÐ €Ð Ðexpressly€pleaded.€€òòSee€J.M.€Westall€&€Co.€v.€Windswept€View€of€Ashevilleóó,€97€N.C.Ð l¼ ÐApp.€71,€76,€387€S.E.2d€67,€69„70,€òòdisc.€review€deniedóó,€327€N.C.€139,€394€S.E.2dÐ X ¨ Ð175€(1990).€€Where€the€evidence€which€supports€an€unpleaded€issue€also€tends€toÐ D!” Ðsupport€an€issue€properly€raised€by€the€pleadings,€however,€failure€to€object€does€notÐ 0"€  Ðamount€to€implied€consent€to€try€the€unpleaded€issue.€€òòTyson€v.€Ciba„Geigy€Corp.óó,Ð #l! Ð82€N.C.€App.€626,€630,€347€S.E.2d€473,€476€(1986).Ð$X"Ð Ð  ÐÌòòMembers€Interior€Constr.€v.€Leader€Constr.óó,€476€S.E.2d€399,€402€(N.C.App.€1996).Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€charged€the€jury€relative€to€the€elements€of€fraud,€malice,€gross€negligence,Ð ¸'#& Ðand€oppression€as€those€elements€relate€to€punitive€damages€under€òòHodges€v.€Toofóó,€833€S.W.2d€896Ð ¤(ô#' Ð(Tenn.€1992).€€Under€òòHodges€v.€Toofóó€these€elements€are€common€to€both€tort€and€contract.€€EvidenceÐ )à$( Ðsupporting€those€elements€was€introduced€in€this€case€where€the€tort€of€assault€was€properly€pleaded.Ð |*Ì%) ÐSince€the€evidence€was€not€alone€applicable€to€the€unpleaded€contract€issue€it€was€not€tried€byÐ h+¸&* Ðimplied€consent€under€the€principles€laid€down€in€òòMcLemore€v.€Powellóó.€€While€a€motion€to€amendÐ ° Ðis€not€absolutely€necessary€under€T.R.C.P.€15.02€if€the€issue€is€otherwise€tried€by€implied€consent,Ð œì Ðthe€issue€of€punitive€damages€for€breach€of€contract€would€not€have€been€tried€by€implied€consentÐ ˆØ Ðunder€òòMcLemore€v.€Powellóó€even€if€a€proper€amendment€had€been€proffered.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àThe€issue€raised€by€Shockley€in€this€court€is€ð ðthe€trial€court€should€have€instructed€the€juryÐ L œ Ðon,€and€allowed€the€jury€to€consider,€punitive€damages€for€breach€of€contract€under€the€factsÐ 8 ˆ Ðpresented.ðð€€Appellant€never€sought€an€instruction€to€the€jury€relative€to€punitive€damages€basedÐ $ t Ðupon€breach€of€contract.€€While€the€elements€of€fraud,€malice,€gross€negligence,€and€oppression€areÐ  ` Ðelements€common€to€the€award€of€punitive€damages€either€in€tort€or€in€contract€under€òòHodges€v.Ð ü L  ÐToofóó,€833€S.W.2d€896€(Tenn.€1992),€Appellant€cannot€put€the€trial€court€in€error€for€failing€to€chargeÐ è 8  Ðthe€jury€under€these€circumstances.€€The€action€of€the€trial€court€relative€to€punitive€damages€forÐ Ô$  Ðbreach€of€contract€is€affirmed.Ð À  ÐÌIV.à  àRemittiturÐ ˜è  ÐÌà  àUpon€the€defendantsðð€motion€for€a€new€trial,€the€trial€court€suggested€a€remittitur€in€theÐ pÀ Ðamount€of€$7,500€from€the€general€verdict€awarding€$57,500€in€damages€from€the€breach.€€ShockleyÐ \¬ Ðchallenges€the€remittitur€here.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àThe€statute€provides€the€duty€placed€upon€the€trial€judge€and€the€standard€of€review€we€mustÐ  p Ðapply€in€examining€the€trial€courtððs€action:Ð  \ ÐÌà8  àà ` à(a)€In€all€jury€trials€had€in€civil€actions,€after€the€verdict€has€been€rendered,Ð ä4 Ðand€on€motion€for€a€new€trial,€when€the€trial€judge€is€of€the€opinion€that€the€verdictÐ Ð  Ðin€favor€of€a€party€should€be€reduced,€and€a€remittitur€is€suggested€by€him€on€thatÐ ¼  Ðaccount,€with€the€proviso€that€in€case€the€party€in€whose€favor€the€verdict€has€beenÐ ¨ø Ðrendered€refuses€to€make€remittitur€a€new€trial€will€be€awarded,€the€party€in€whoseÐ ”ä Ðfavor€such€verdict€has€been€rendered€may€make€such€remittitur€under€protest,€andÐ €Ð Ðappeal€from€the€action€of€the€trial€judge€to€the€court€of€appeals.Ðl¼Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` à(b)€The€court€of€appeals€shall€review€the€action€of€the€trial€court€suggestingÐ X ¨ Ða€remittitur€using€the€standard€of€review€provided€for€in€Rule€13(d)€of€the€TennesseeÐ D!” ÐRules€of€Appellate€Procedure€applicable€to€decisions€of€the€trial€court€sitting€withoutÐ 0"€  Ða€jury.€€If,€in€the€opinion€of€the€court€of€appeals,€the€verdict€of€the€jury€should€notÐ #l! Ðhave€been€reduced,€but€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€correct€in€other€respects,€theÐ $X" Ðcase€shall€be€reversed€to€that€extent,€and€judgment€shall€be€rendered€in€the€court€ofÐ ô$D # Ðappeals€for€the€full€amount€originally€awarded€by€the€jury€in€the€trial€court.Ðà%0!$Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€20„10„102.Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àIn€granting€the€remittitur€the€trial€court€held:Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) Ðà8  àà ` àThe€issue€raised€in€paragraph€three€of€the€Defendantsðð€motion€is€well„taken.€Ð ° Ðâ âIt€appears€from€the€transcript€that€under€the€original€contract€there€was€no€discussionÐ œì Ðabout€the€Plaintiff€being€required€to€use€a€cutter€to€remove€the€trees€frm€theÐ ˆØ ÐDefendantsðð€property.€€It€was€the€Plaintiffððs€testimony€that€months€into€the€contractÐ tÄ Ðthe€Defendant€requested€and/or€stated€that€the€Plaintiff€should€use€a€cutter€instead€ofÐ `° Ða€chainsaw€to€remove€the€trees.€€Plaintiff€had€the€opportunity€at€that€point€to€seekÐ L œ Ðassistance€from€the€Court€if€he€felt€this€was€a€breach€of€the€original€contract.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐHowever,€it€was€not€proven€that€the€Plaintiff€would€have€been€prohibited€fromÐ $ t Ðlogging€the€trees€and€a€chainsaw,€although€that€appeared€to€be€the€DefendantsððÐ  ` Ðindication.€€It€is€unknown€whether€the€Defendants€would€have€allowed€the€PlaintiffÐ ü L  Ðto€complete€the€contract€with€chainsaws€as€he€had€begun.€€Therefore,€the€juryððsÐ è 8  Ðverdict€stands€as€rendered€with€the€exception€that€their€award€of€$57,500.00€to€theÐ Ô$  ÐPlaintiff€is€reduced€by€the€sum€of€$7,500.00,€for€a€total€award€of€$50,000.00.ÐÀ Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àAs€our€supreme€court€has€held,€ð ð[T]rial€judges€may€suggest€adjustments€when€the€jury€verdictÐ ˜è  Ðis€within€the€range€of€reasonableness,€as€an€alternative€to€the€practice€of€granting€a€new€trial,€if€theyÐ „Ô  Ðare€of€the€opinion€that€the€jury€verdict€is€not€adequate.€€T.C.A.€ðð€20„10„101.€€òòSee€alsoóó,€T.C.A.€ðð€20„Ð pÀ Ð10„102.ðð€€òòFoster€v.€AmCon€International,€Inc.óó,€621€S.W.2d€142,€147€(Tenn.€1981).Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àThe€proof€adduced€at€trial€establishes€a€fairly€broad€range€of€reasonableness.€€The€trial€courtÐ 4„ Ðfound€in€its€order€that€the€$7,500€was€not€properly€considerable€as€a€measure€of€damages,€and€wasÐ  p Ðindeed€considered€by€the€jury€despite€the€general€nature€of€the€verdict.€€The€action€of€the€trial€courtÐ  \ Ðis€in€keeping€with€the€rule€stated€by€this€court€in€òòBaker€v.€Riverside€Church€of€Godóó,€453€S.W.2d€801Ð øH Ð(Tenn.Ct.App.€1970):Ð ä4 ÐÌà8  àà ` àA€general€statement€of€the€rule€is€found€in€Corpus€Juris€Secundum€as€follows:м Ð Ð  Ðà  àà8 ` àà ¸ àððAs€a€general€rule,€sometimes€expressed€in€statutoryÐ ¨ø Ðenactments,€the€damages€to€which€one€party€to€a€contract€is€entitledÐ ”ä Ðbecause€of€a€breach€thereof€by€the€other€are€such€as€arise€naturallyÐ €Ð Ðfrom€the€breach€itself,€or€such€as€may€reasonably€be€supposed€to€haveÐ l¼ Ðbeen€within€the€contemplation€of€the€parties€at€the€time€of€making€theÐ X ¨ Ðcontract€as€a€probable€result€of€a€breach€thereof,€or,€as€sometimesÐ D!” Ðstated,€such€as€were€reasonably€foreseeable€and€within€theÐ 0"€  Ðcontemplation€of€the€parties€at€the€time€they€made€the€contract.Ð#l!` x` x Ðà  àà8 ` àà ¸ àConversely,€damages€which€do€not€arise€naturally€from€aÐ $X" Ðbreach€of€the€contract,€or€which€are€not€within€the€reasonableÐ ô$D # Ðcontemplation€of€the€parties,€are€not€recoverable.€€The€promisor€is€notÐ à%0!$ Ðrequired€to€compensate€the€injured€party€for€injuries€which€theÐ Ì&"% Ðpromisor,€when€he€made€the€contract,€had€no€reason€to€foresee€as€theÐ ¸'#& Ðprobable€result€of€his€breach.ðð€€Vol.€25€C.J.S.€Damages€s€27a,€pp.Ð ¤(ô#' Ð662„„667.Ð)à$(` x` x ÐÌòòBakeróó,€453€S.W.2d€at€809.€€The€trial€courtððs€action€on€the€motion€is€affirmed.Ð h+¸&* ЇÌÌÌV.à  àJuror€Don€Dewayne€ShockleyÐ tÄ ÐÌà  àThe€jurors€sworn€included€Don€Shockley€but€excluded€Ronald€Shockley.€€The€voir€direÐ L œ Ðtranscript€reveals€very€little€information€as€to€the€actual€nature€of€the€jurorsðð€Shockley€relationshipÐ 8 ˆ Ðto€the€plaintiff.€€Nonetheless€when€asked€of€any€kinship€or€relationship€two€hands€were€raised.€€AtÐ $ t Ðthis€point€in€the€proceeding€all€parties€are€on€notice€as€to€the€possible€kinship€problems€inherent€inÐ  ` ÐTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€22„1„105.€€The€defendant€was€afforded€adequate€opportunity€toÐ ü L  Ðexplore€that€relationship.€€The€challenge€presented€to€this€court€is€one€of€òòpropter€defectumóó.€€The€wellÐ è 8  Ðsettled€rule€in€this€jurisdiction€provides€that,€absent€some€concealment€on€the€part€of€the€juror,€aÐ Ô$  Ðkinship€as€contemplated€by€the€statute€amounts€to€a€disqualification€òòpropter€defectumóó€rather€thenÐ À  Ðòòpropter€affectumóó.€€These€juror€challenges€are€explained€thus:Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà8  àà ` àThere€are€two€broad€classes€of€causes€for€challenge€of€a€juror:€(1)€propterÐ „Ô  Ðdefectum€(on€account€of€some€defect)€from€personal€objections€as€alienage,€infancy,€Ð pÀ Ðlack€of€statutory€requirements,€etc.,€and€(2)€propter€affectum€(on€account€of€partiality)Ð \¬ Ðfrom€some€bias€or€partiality€either€actually€shown€to€exist€or€presumed€to€exist€fromÐ H˜ Ðcircumstances.€€òòDurham€v.€Stateóó,€182€Tenn.€577,€188€S.W.2d€d555€(1945).Ð4„Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àGenerally,€objections€to€a€juror€based€upon€causes€propter€defectum€cannotÐ  p Ðbe€made€after€verdict.€€òòMonday€v.€Stateóó,€160€Tenn.€258,€23€S.W.2d€656€(1930);Ð  \ ÐòòNashville€C.€&€St.€L.€Ry.€v.€Williamsóó,€164€Tenn.€144,€46€S.W.2d€815€(1932).€€TheÐ øH Ðreason€for€the€rule€is€that€a€mere€technical€defect,€or€the€failure€to€a€juror€to€meet€theÐ ä4 Ðcertain€required€qualifications,€does€not€raise€the€presumption€of€bias€on€his€part.€Ð Ð  ÐUnless€prejudice€be€actually€shown€it€cannot€be€presumed€that€the€technicallyÐ ¼  Ðincompetent€juror€was€not€impartial€and€fair€in€his€deliberations.ШøÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àHowever,€objections€to€a€juror€based€upon€causes€propter€affectum€may€beÐ ”ä Ðmade€after€verdict.€€òòDurham€v.€State,€supraóó.€€The€ground€for€challenge€in€the€instantÐ €Ð Ðcase€is€the€deliberate€withholding€of€information€asked€for€on€voir€dire.€€ThisÐ l¼ Ðamounts€to€false€swearing€and€does€raise€the€presumption€of€bias€and€partiality.ÐX ¨Ð Ð  ÐòòÌTennessee€Farmers€Mutual€Company€v.€Greeróó,€682€S.W.2d€920,€923„4€(Tenn.Ct.App.€1984).Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àThe€record€before€us€shows€no€such€misconduct€by€juror€Shockley.€€Counsel€for€both€partiesÐ $X" Ðwere€afforded€an€opportunity€to€examine€the€juror€in€question.€€Counsel€Mills€conducted€voir€direÐ ô$D # Ðon€behalf€of€the€plaintiff€Shockley.€€The€record€of€that€examination€reveals€the€following€exchange:Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà8  àà ` àMR.€MILLS:€How€many€people€that€raised€their€hands€are€related€to€him€andÐ ¸'#& Ðwill€admit€to€it?Ф(ô#'Ð Ð  Ðà  à(two€hands€raised).Ð )à$( Ðà8  àà ` àMR.€MILLS:€Does€that€mean€the€rest€of€you€are€not€related€or€youððre€notÐ |*Ì%) Ðadmitting€to€it?€€What€is€your€name€sir?Ðh+¸&*Ð Ð  Ðà  àà ` àJUROR:€Ronnie€Shockley.Ð ° Ðà8  àà ` àMR.€MILLS:€That€would€make€sense€that€you€are€related.€€How€are€youÐ œì Ðrelated?ЈØÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` àJUROR:€Iððm€his€first€cousin.Ð tÄ Ðà  àà ` àMR.€MILLS:€Okay.Ð `° Ðà  àà ` àJUROR:€Iððm€related€to€him€way€off.Ð L œ Ðà  àà ` àMR.€MILLS:€Some€distant€cousin?Ð 8 ˆ Ðà  àà ` àJUROR:€Yes,€about€four€or€five€down.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àThere€were€two€jurors€with€the€Shockley€name€called€for€service€on€October€8,€2002,€DonÐ ü L  ÐShockley€and€Ronnie€Shockley.€€When€Mr.€Conger,€counsel€for€the€defendants€conducted€his€voirÐ è 8  Ðdire€the€sum€of€his€questions€as€to€relationship€or€kinship€is€as€follows:Ð Ô$  ÐÌà8  àà ` àMR.€CONGER:€And€about€half€of€you€knew€Mr.€Shockley€here;€is€that€aboutÐ ¬ü  Ðright?€€Letððs€see€that€show€of€hands€again€that€knows€Mr.€Shockley.Иè Ð Ð  Ðà  à(Hands€raised).Ð „Ô  Ðà  àà ` àMR.€CONGER:€And€this€Mr.€Shockley€was€a€distant€relative€of€his?Ð pÀ Ðà  àà ` àJUROR:€Yes.Ð \¬ Ðà  àà ` àMR.€CONGER:€You€said€third€or€fourth€cousin,€somewhere€down€the€line?Ð H˜ Ðà  àà ` àJUROR:€Yes.Ð 4„ Ðà  àÌà  àCounsel€chose€not€to€delve€further€into€the€alleged€relationship€between€the€plaintiff€and€theÐ  \ Ðjuror€Don€Dewayne€Shockley,€nor€did€he€challenge€the€prospective€juror€either€for€cause€or€byÐ øH Ðperemptory€challenge.Ð ä4 ÐÌà8  àà ` àThe€common€law€rules€governing€challenges€to€juror€qualifications€fall€intoÐ ¼  Ðtwo€general€categories:€(a)€propter€defectum€or€(2)€propter€affectum.€€òòPartin€v.Ð ¨ø ÐHendersonóó,€686€S.W.2d€587,€589€(Tenn.App.€1984),€òòperm.€to€appeal€denied,€idóó.Ð ”ä Ð(Tenn.€1985).€€Objections€based€upon€general€disqualifications,€such€as€alienage,Ð €Ð Ðfamily€relationship,€or€statutory€mandate,€are€within€the€propter€defectum€class€and,Ð l¼ Ðas€such,€are€considered€waived€if€not€made€prior€to€the€swearing€of€the€jury.€€òòMurphyÐ X ¨ Ðv.€Stateóó,€560€s.W.2d€414,€415€(Tenn.Crim.App.€1977),€òòcert.€denied,€id.€€óó(Tenn.€1978).ÐD!”Ð Ð  ÐÌòòState€v.€Brockóó,€940€S.W.2d,€577,€579€(Tenn.Crim.App.€1996).Ð #l! ÐÌVI.€€Proof€of€DamagesÐ ô$D # ÐÌà  àAppelleesðð€claim€that€the€proof€of€damages€offered€by€Shockley€is€inadequate€to€sustain€theÐ Ì&"% Ðjury€verdict€and€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€because€of€the€general€prohibition€against€the€awardÐ ¸'#& Ðof€speculative€damages.€€Appellees€admit€the€breach€of€the€contract,€and€Shockley€offers€evidenceÐ ¤(ô#' Ðas€to€his€damages.€€The€prohibition€against€speculative€damages€applies€generally€to€the€existenceÐ )à$( Ðof€damages€and€loses€its€potency€when€it€is€interjected€as€a€challenge€only€to€the€extent€of€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðdamages.Ð h+¸&* Їà8  àà ` àThe€courts€will€allow€recovery€even€if€it€is€impossible€to€prove€the€exactÐ ° Ðamount€of€damages€from€the€breach€of€contract.€€Otherwise,€in€certain€instances,€theÐ œì Ðcourts€would€be€powerless€to€help€some€wronged€parties.€€ð ðExact€justice€is€notÐ ˆØ Ðalways€attained,€and€the€law€does€not€require€exactness€of€computation€in€suits€thatÐ tÄ Ðinvolve€questions€of€damages€growing€out€of€contract€or€tort.ðð€€òòProvident€Life€andÐ `° ÐAccident€Ins.€Co.€v.€Globe€Indemnity€Co.óó,€156€Tenn.€571,€576,€3€S.W.2d€1057Ð L œ Ð(1928).€€In€òòCoverdell€v.€Mid„South€Farm€Equipment€Assoc.,€Inc.óó,€335€F.2d€9€(6th€Cir.Ð 8 ˆ Ð1964),€the€court€applied€Tennessee€law€to€determine€that€an€insurance€company€agentÐ $ t Ðwho€was€informed€by€trustees€of€the€defendant€corporation€that€he€had€been€hiredÐ  ` Ðunder€a€personal€service€contract€to€organize€their€group€insurance,€worked€an€entireÐ ü L  Ðweekend€on€the€project,€and€cancelled€an€appointment€in€Texas€was€damaged€whenÐ è 8  Ðthe€trustees€gave€the€contract€to€another€agent.€€Uncertain€and€speculative€damagesÐ Ô$  Ðare€prohibited€only€when€the€existence€of€damage€is€uncertain,€not€when€the€amountÐ À  Ðis€uncertain.€€When€there€is€substantial€evidence€in€the€record€and€reasonableÐ ¬ü  Ðinferences€may€be€drawn€from€that€evidence€mathematical€certainty€is€not€required.€Ð ˜è  ÐòòId.óó€at€14.€Ð„Ô Ð Ð  ÐÌòòCummins€v.€Brodieóó,€667€S.W.2d€759,€765€(Tenn.Ct.App.€1983);€òòsee€also€Moore€Constr.€v.Ð \¬ ÐClarksville€Depððt€of€Electricityóó,€707€S.W.2d€1,€15€(Tenn.Ct.App.€1985).Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àWhile€the€testimonial€proof€of€damages€offered€by€Shockley€is€less€than€exact,€the€record€is€Ð  p Ðsufficient€to€support€the€judgment€in€this€case€and€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€theÐ  \ Ðjudgment€of€the€trial€court€as€to€compensatory€damages,€modified€as€it€is€by€his€grant€of€theÐ øH Ðremittitur.€€The€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€in€all€respects€affirmed€and€the€case€is€remanded€to€theÐ ä4 Ðtrial€court€for€such€further€proceedings€as€may€be€necessary.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àCosts€are€assessed€against€Appellants.€Ð ¨ø ЀÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à____________________________________Ð D!” Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWILLIAM€B.€CAIN,€JUDGE