Legal Opinion

Wedeman v. City Chevrolet Co.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided November 26, 1976No. [No. 42, September Term, 1976.]PublishedCited by 78 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLevine, J.

We granted certiorari here to decide whether punitive damages may be recovered without proof of actual malice in an action for fraud. In City Chevrolet v. Wedeman, 30 Md. App. 637, 354 A. 2d 185 (1976), the Court of Special Appeals held that in this case they were not recoverable, since the fraud was a tort arising out of a contractual relationship. Accordingly, proof of actual malice was required but not met. In so holding, the court reversed a punitive damage award of $6,000 returned by a jury in the Superior Court of Baltimore City (Perrott, J.). We think the Court of Special Appeals erred.

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Walker v. SheldonNew York Court of Appeals · 1961
  2. Hardy v. TolerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  3. St. Paul at Chase Corp. v. Manufacturers Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1971
  4. Knickerbocker Ice Co. v. Gardiner Dairy Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1908
  5. H & R BLOCK, INC. v. TestermanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1975

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by78 opinions

  1. Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. ZenobiaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1992
  2. K & K Management, Inc. v. Chul Woo LeeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1989
  3. Saval v. BL Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1983
  4. Nails v. S & R, INC.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1994
  5. Wilmington Trust Co. v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1981

73 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API