Nickerson v. Hodges
84 So. 37, 9 A.L.R. 361, 146 La. 735 (1920)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A party who perpetrates a practical joke is liable for damages when it foreseeably results in severe mental suffering, humiliation, and disappointment for the victim, even if there was no specific intent to cause injury.
Facts:
- Miss Carrie E. Nickerson, influenced by family tradition and a fortune teller, believed a pot of gold was buried on property owned by John W. Smith.
- For several months, Nickerson and her associates dug extensively on the Smith property, becoming a nuisance to the community.
- H. R. Hayes, William Baker, and Minnie Smith (defendants) decided to play a practical joke to convince Nickerson of her folly.
- The defendants filled an old copper pot with rocks and dirt, included a misleading note, and buried it where Nickerson was likely to dig.
- On April 14th, the pot was 'discovered,' and Nickerson, believing it contained gold, deposited it in a local bank.
- Days later, at a public unveiling at the bank attended by relatives and others, the pot was opened, revealing the contents to be a hoax.
- Upon realizing the deception, Nickerson experienced extreme humiliation and flew into a rage.
- The defendants were aware that Nickerson had previously been an inmate in an insane asylum.
Procedural Posture:
- Miss Carrie E. Nickerson filed suit in a state trial court against H. R. Hayes and nine other defendants, seeking damages.
- Before the trial, Miss Nickerson died, and her legal heirs were substituted as plaintiffs.
- The case was tried before a jury, which returned a verdict in favor of all defendants.
- The plaintiffs filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied by the trial court.
- The plaintiffs (appellants) appealed the jury's verdict and the denial of the new trial to this appellate court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Do the actions of orchestrating a practical joke, which resulted in severe emotional distress and humiliation for the victim, constitute an actionable tort for which damages may be recovered?
Opinions:
Majority - Dawkins, J.
Yes. A party is liable for damages caused by a practical joke that results in foreseeable, severe emotional distress. Although the defendants merely intended their actions as a practical joke and had no willful intention to injure Miss Nickerson, the consequences were severe and foreseeable. The court acknowledged Nickerson's pre-existing vulnerability (a prior stay in an insane asylum) and the profound mental suffering and humiliation she endured as a direct result of the defendants' deception. The harm was not in the loss of a non-existent treasure, but in the 'unbearable' disappointment, humiliation, and public embarrassment inflicted upon her. Because the injury was real and the result of the defendants' intentional acts, they are liable for the resulting damages.
Dissenting - Sommerville and O'Niell, JJ.
No reasoning provided. The judges noted their dissent from the majority opinion without explanation.
Analysis:
This case is an early and foundational example of the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress, even though it does not use that modern terminology. It establishes the principle that an act intended as a 'joke' can still be tortious if it foreseeably leads to severe emotional harm. The decision is significant for recognizing that purely emotional and psychological injuries are compensable, shifting focus from physical harm to the severity of the mental suffering. This precedent makes it clear that intent to perform the act is sufficient for liability, even without a specific malicious intent to cause the resulting harm, especially when the victim's vulnerabilities are known to the perpetrators.
Unlock the full brief for Nickerson v. Hodges