Terwilliger v. Wands case brief
Facts: Plaintiff sues defendant for comments made by him: comments were that plaintiff ran to Ms. Fuller to have sex with her, that he always ran to her and he had a regular path to her door and that he would do all he could to keep her husband in prison.
Only damages proved was that plaintiff was prostrated in health and could not attend business after hearing of those remarks. A motion for nonsuit was sustained
Decision: Judgment affirmed.
Reasoning: Special damages must be proved by showing that the damages must have been the natural, immediate and legal consequence of words spoken. It is injuries affecting a person’s reputation which are actionable, and not their mental health. Loss of character must be a substantive loss in these types of cases, nothing else is actionable.