Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

61 Miss. 24

Taylor v. Morton

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided October 15, 1883

Mississippi Supreme Court · decided 1883-10-15

Hon. T. J. Wharton, Judge. In this action of replevin by the appellee against the appellant, the verdict was, “ We, the jury, find for the plaintiff, that he is entitled to the immediate possession of the mule in controversy, or its value, which we assess at fifty dollars; also five dollars interest on same at six per cent, from the time of taking; also twelve dollars damages for time lost by plaintiff in prosecuting his suit; also ten dollars punitive damages for attorney’s…

Relies on Chicago, St. Louis & New Orleans Railroad v. Scurr · Whitfield v. Whitfield · Cowden v. Lockridge

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1883-10-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently May 1978

11 state decisions

301883189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Cooper, J.,

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2By the third instruction the jury were'told in effect, that if William Morton, the plaintiff, was entitled to recover the possession of the mule in controversy, he was also entitled to recover for the value of his time lost in prosecuting his claim. This was error. Cowden v. Lockridge, 60 Miss. 385. By the fourth instruction the jury were charged that if they believed from the evidence the taking or detention of the mule was attended by circumstances of fraud, wrong, or oppression they could allow the plaintiff his attorney’s fee. Since every violation of a legal right is a legal wrong, it would follow from the announcement of this proposition that exemplary damages might be allowed in all cases in which a recovery is had by the plaintiff. There must be more than a mere wrong, it must be a willful wrong, something akin to fraud, oppression, or malice. Whitfield v. Whitfield, 40 Miss. 352; Chicago Railroad Co. v. Scurr, 59 Miss. 456. We fail to discover any testimony from which the jury might have fairly inferred any willful wrong on the part of the defendant. To us it seems there was a bona fide claim of title both by the plaintiff and the defendant, and in such cases the value of the' property, with interest thereon, is the measure of damages.

¶3Judgment reversed.

/61/miss/24 · .json · Public domain