PJC Business 2024

C IVIL C ONSPIRACY

PJC 109.1

Scope of the conspiracy. In First United Pentecostal Church of Beaumont , the supreme court discussed the scope of a conspiracy and damages. Wrongful acts that occurred before the conspiracy do not “tack on to the conspiracy, and support liability for each member of the conspiracy as to prior acts.” First United Pentecostal Church of Beaumont , 514 S.W.3d at 224. When there is a fact question as to when the conspir acy began or as to the scope of the conspiracy, this question should be modified to ask those questions. Liability. The damages recoverable in an action for civil conspiracy are those damages resulting from the commission of the wrong, not the conspiratorial agree ment. Agar Corp. , 580 S.W.3d at 142; Carroll v. Timmers Chevrolet, Inc. , 592 S.W.2d 922, 925 (Tex. 1979); see also Schlumberger Well Surveying Corp. , 435 S.W.2d at 856. Therefore, the Committee recommends that PJC 109.1 be submitted after, and conditioned on, an affirmative finding of damages caused by the statutory violation or underlying tort (other than negligence). In those instances in which the evidence sug gests that divisible damages arose from multiple underlying torts only some of which were the subject of the conspiracy, the court should consider obtaining findings to determine which underlying statutory violations or torts were the subject of the con spiracy and the damages and submitting a separate issue on damages caused by those underlying violations or torts. See THPD, Inc. v. Continental Imports, Inc. , 260 S.W.3d 593, 604–05 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008, no pet.). Similarly, a claimant may need a sep arate damage question, to reflect the timing and scope of the conspiracy. First United Pentecostal Church of Beaumont , 514 S.W.3d at 224. Exemplary damages. An affirmative finding on an underlying cause of action that includes a finding sufficient to impose exemplary damages may be imputed to all participants in the conspiracy on an affirmative conspiracy finding. Akin , 661 S.W.2d at 921. For questions submitting exemplary damages, see PJC 115.37 and 115.38 and the Comments accompanying those questions.

371