PJC Business

PJC 115.20

D AMAGES

COMMENT When to use. PJC 115.20 should be predicated on a “Yes” answer to PJC 105.1 or 105.7 and may be adapted for use in most fraud cases by the addition of appropriate instructions setting out legally available measures of damages. See PJC 115.4, 115.5, and 115.10. If only one measure of damages is supported by the pleadings and proof, the measure may be incorporated into the question. Instruction required. PJC 115.20 should not be submitted without an instruction on the appropriate measures of damages. See Jackson v. Fontaine’s Clinics, Inc. , 499 S.W.2d 87, 90 (Tex. 1973). See PJC 115.4, 115.5, and 115.10 for sample instructions. Proximate cause — consequential damages. PJC 115.20 should be used only for the submission of consequential or special damages in fraud cases. Consequential or special damages are those damages which result “naturally, but not necessarily, from the tortious act.” J&D Towing, LLC v. American Alternative Insurance Corp. , 478 S.W.3d 649, 655 (Tex. 2016). To be recoverable, such damages must be the “proxi mate result” of fraud. Airborne Freight Corp. v. C.R. Lee Enterprises , 847 S.W.2d 289, 295 (Tex. App.—El Paso 1992, writ denied); El Paso Development Co. v. Ravel , 339 S.W.2d 360, 363 (Tex. App.—El Paso 1960, writ ref’d n.r.e.), cited and relied on in Trenholm v. Ratcliff , 646 S.W.2d 927, 933 (Tex. 1983); see also Morriss-Buick Co. v. Pondrom , 113 S.W.2d 889, 890 (Tex. 1938) (loss resulting directly and proximately from fraud). For a description of general and special damages, see Sherrod v. Bailey , 580 S.W.2d 24, 28 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1979, writ ref’d n.r.e.). PJC 115.19 should be used to submit direct damages, and PJC 115.38 may be used to submit exemplary damages. Elements of damages submitted separately. The Committee generally recom mends that multiple elements of damages be separately submitted to the jury. Harris County v. Smith , 96 S.W.3d 230, 233–34 (Tex. 2002) (broad-form submission of valid and invalid elements of damages may lead to harmful error if there is a proper objec tion raising insufficiency of the evidence to support one or more of the elements sub mitted); see also Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §41.008(a) (“In an action in which a claimant seeks recovery of damages, the trier of fact shall determine the amount of economic damages separately from the amount of other compensatory damages.”). Separating economic from noneconomic damages is required to allow the court to apply the limits on recovery of exemplary damages based on economic and noneco nomic damages as required by Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 41.008(b). Further, “[p]rejudgment interest may not be assessed or recovered on an award of future damages.” Tex. Fin. Code § 304.1045 (wrongful death, personal injury, or prop erty damage cases). Therefore, separation of past and future damages is required. Elements considered separately. Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson , 116 S.W.3d 757, 770 (Tex. 2003), provides an instruction for cases involving undefined or

466