This is a false imprisonment action in which the plaintiff seeks damages for a 51-day confinement at a nursing home against his will. At trial the jury awarded the plaintiff damages for physical pain and discomfort, and for mental suffering, humiliation, shame and fright, as well as exemplary damages. The nursing home appeals claiming that there was insufficient evidence to support the outcome.

Sample Brief of Big Town

Case: Big Town v. Newman, 
Tex.Civ.App. (Waco) 1970, 461 S.W.2d 195

Facts:

Plaintiff is a 67-year old retired printer with no history of mental disease though he has some significant medical problems. Although he'd had a history drinking, he'd had no alcohol at any of the times in question. On September 22, 1968, plaintiff's nephew had placed him in a nursing home and plaintiff was not told that he could not leave at will. Three days after the placement the plaintiff tried to call a taxi to leave. He was not allowed to use the phone, his possessions were locked up and when he tried to walk away, he was placed in locked quarters with difficult-to-control persons. He tried to run away 5 or 6 times and was returned forcibly each time. Once he was taped into a restraining chair. Each request for release was refused by the manager and assistant manager. He finally escaped on November 11, 1968, and caught a ride to Dallas. (Comments from the Professor)

[ISSUE #1]

Issue

Whether there is any evidence to support the jury' finding finding finding that the nursing home acted "recklessly, or willfully and maliciously and with a design to oppress and injure the plaintiff."

Holding

The record reveals that there is evidence to support the jury' finding that the nursing home acted "recklessly, or willfully and maliciously and with a design to oppress and injure the plaintiff."

Rationale

See below. The sufficiency standard is higher than the any-evidence standard. Since the court found sufficient evidence, then, obviously it found some evidence.

[ISSUE #2]

Issue

Whether evidence was sufficient to support the jury' findings findings findings that - the nursing home acted "recklessly, or willfully and maliciously and with a design to oppress and injure the plaintiff."

Holding

There is ample evidence in the record to support the findings that the nursing home acted "recklessly, or willfully and maliciously and with a design to oppress and injure the plaintiff" and that the plaintiff should get exemplary damages

Rationale

A defendant may be compelled to respond in exemplary damages if the act causing actual damages is a wrongful act done intentionally in violation o f the rights of the plaintiff

The court points to the defendant' "utter disregard" for the right of the plaintiff. There was no court order and the admission papers explicitly stated that he could not be prevented from leaving.

Nevertheless, the court finds that the aware was excessive in the amount of $12,000.

 

[Issue #3]

Issue

Whether there is sufficient evidence to support the jury' findings

- that the plaintiff was falsely imprisoned

- and that plaintiff' damages are $5,000 for physical pain and discomfort and $7,500 for mental suffering, humiliation, shame and fright

And whether such findings were against the weight of the evidence.

Holding

The record reveals sufficient evidence to support the jury' finding that the plaintiff was falsely imprisoned and suffered $5,000 in physical pain and discomfort and $7,500 in mental suffering, humiliation, shame and fright.

Rationale

False imprisonment is the direct restraint of one person of the physical liberty of another without adequate legal justification.

The record shows that plaintiff was directly restrained in these ways:

He was prohibited from using the phone to call a taxi.

He was brought back on those occasions when he tried to leave.

He was locked in; his clothing was locked up.

He was held in a restraint chair.

[Damages are supported by the 30# loss, being treated as if he were mentally incompetent and plaintiff' repeated efforts to extricate himself.]

* The defendant raised three issues on appeal. These are each treated in this model because the case comes early in the course. In class I would use all three issues to illustrate the difference between an assertion that there is no evidence to support a judgment and an assertion that there is insufficient evidence to support a judgment. I would also explore the difference between the two kinds of damages: exemplary on the one hand, and physical pain and discomfort and mental suffering, humiliation, shame and fright, on the other. For purposes of this exercise I have focused on the third issue in order to explore one small facet of the decision.