Hardwick v. Williams

Bobby Hardwick’s wife of thirty years died as a result of a cancer-related condition. On the day of her death, John Williams, Hardwick’s father-in-law, allegedly made a verbal promise to give Hardwick $3,000 of a life insurance policy over which he had control to help defray burial costs. Williams denies having made such a promise. When Williams subsequently refused to turn over the money, Hardwick filed the present pro se action, suing Williams for both compensatory and punitive damages. Williams filed a motion for summary judgment. The trial court granted Williams’ motion as to the issue of punitive and consequential damages, but found that a jury issue existed regarding whether the parties entered into an agreement concerning the disposition of the life insurance proceeds. Hardwick appeals, alleging the trial court erred in granting summary judgment on his punitive and consequential damages claims. We find no error.

In the argument in support of his appellate brief, Hardwick alleges that because of Williams’ refusal to pay him the $3,000, his wife’s body was “locked away” from him for four days. As a result, Hardwick contends he has “not been able to sleep, or hold down a job due to the emotional distress suffered by him.” “Because Hardwick’s claims for mental pain and suffering are not pecuniary damages, they cannot be recovered pursuant to his contract claims.”1 Moreover, it is well-established that punitive damages are not recoverable in actions for breach of contract.2 The trial court did not err by granting summary judgment on the punitive and consequential damages claims.