Avina v. Spurlock

Opinion

BROWN (G. A.), J.

In this case the central issue is whether the trial court erred as a matter of law in awarding $501 as nominal damages. We have concluded that $501 is far in excess of the amount that can. legally constitute nominal damages and modify the judgment accordingly.

The suit was commenced by the plaintiff tenants for wrongful eviction and wrongful detention of personal property from leased premises against the defendant landlords. The court, sitting without a jury, found the plaintiffs had been unlawfully evicted and that defendants unlawfully detained plaintiffs’ personal property. The court further found:

“(6) No evidence of monetary damages suffered by plaintiffs was presented to the court. They did not rent other accommodations while there was some evidence of sixkness [szc], no mention was made as to cost of medical treatment. Michael Avina, Sr., testified that he lost his job, but there was no evidence as to when he secured another.

“(7) There was no evidence as to the value of the personal property

[1088]

removed from the premises by defendants nor was there evidence as to the reasonable value of its loss of use.”

and concluded in pertinent part:

“(3) In the absence of evidence of damages the most that can be done is to award nominal damages. [Citation.] Under ah of the circumstances, the court is of the opinion that nominal damages should be awarded to plaintiffs from defendants in the sum of $501.00.

“(5) The court is unable to award any damages for the retention of the personal property.

“(6) Punitive damages will be denied. [Citation.]”

The appeal is upon the judgment roll alone (Code Civ. Proc., § 670). No transcript of the evidence is before us. Accordingly, only matters appearing in the clerk’s transcript are to be considered. Under these circumstances, the evidence is conclusively presumed to support the findings, including the finding that no compensatory damages, special or general, were suffered by respondents.