Pattison v. Goings

Cooper, C. J., delivered the opinion of the court. • The facts of this case warranted the jury in the infliction of punitive damages. Whether such damages may be aAvarded Avhere there is only a nominal injury inflicted on the plaintiff it is not necessary to decide, since the evidence discloses a real injury, though uncertain in extent. One in the orderly and lawful prosecution of his business cannot be said to be only nominally injured by the unwarranted and illegal seizure and detention of his property by another, so as to interrupt the course of business of the owner. Pattison acted in the matter as the agent of the firm; it Avas in the prosecution of the firm’s business and under claim of title for the firm that he seized the cotton and placed it in their Avarehouse. Under these circumstances Robinson, even though he personally took no part in the illegal act, Avas equally liable at the Suit of the owner. Story on Part. 166, 168 ; Cooley on Torts 150; Parsons on Part, n., 150; Castle v. Bullard, 23 How. (U. S.) *505 172; Lothrop v. Adams, 133 Mass. 471; Lock v. Stearns, 1 Metc. 560; White v. Sawyer, 16 Gray 586 ; Chester v. Dickerson, 54 N. Y. 1; Guillou v. Peterson, 89 Penna. St. 163. Judgment affirmed.