Jordan v. Yankey

McWilliams, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Ivan Jordan, suspecting he was being cuckolded by Yankey, went to Damascus with “live coals in his heart.” 1 There he found Yankey and, with an assist from his son Wayne, beat him cruelly. Yankey filed suit forthwith. The Jordans tell us that Yankey’s judgment against them ($6,000) should be set at naught.

Although the juicier details of the affair have been omitted from the record, the facts, as we now relate them, are virtually undisputed. Precisely when Yankey became enamored of Rosemary Jordan is uncertain, but that it was prior to 26 July 1969 is clear. It seems that in the evening of that day they met at the home of Floyd Ratliff in Damascus, which is about ten miles north of their Gaithersburg residences. “In the small hours of the morning of Sunday 27 July” ²³⁹ Ivan and Wayne broke into Ratliff’s house. They found Rosemary in the bedroom.

Yankey was not in sight but shortly thereafter Wayne found him in the bedroom closet. He dragged him out and called his father. Ivan came into the bedroom and together they set upon Yankey. They kicked him in the right eye, they broke his nose, they fractured his cheek bone and they knocked out one of his teeth.

What happened to Rosemary was not revealed. The case came on for trial in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County before Moore, J., and a jury, on 7 January 1970. The evidence established, among other things, that Yankey suffered about a 30 per cent impairment of his right eye, that he lost time from his job, and that he incurred substantial medical expense. Judge Moore refused to direct a verdict for the Jordans both at the close of the plaintiff’s case and again at the close of the whole case.

Instead he directed a verdict for Yankey against Ivan on the issue of liability. He then submitted the case to the jury with what we shall assume were adequate and appropriate instructions, since no exceptions were noted by either party. Late in the afternoon the jury returned to the courtroom and announced that they had “agreed upon a verdict.” What follows is an excerpt from the partial transcript of the proceedings: “THE CLERK: Whom do you find for, the plaintiff Floyd Yankey or defendant Wayne Jordan? “THE FOREMAN: For the plaintiff. “THE CLERK: For what amount do you find in compensatory damages ? “THE FOREMAN: Whatever the fixed amount; five thousand was the amount we arrived at. “THE CLERK: Five thousand? “THE FOREMAN: Yes; for punitive cmd I presume compensatory. “THE COURT: You did not make a separate award? ²⁴⁰ “THE FOREMAN: No, we did not. We were under the impression that the compensatory were fixed. # * * “ (A bench conference was had, as follows:) “THE COURT: There should technically be a separate amount for damages as to each. “MR.

CRAWFORD [Counsel for the Jordans] : I would say at this time, Your Honor, I think the verdict is improper and I would move for a mistrial.” # * * “THE COURT: The motion is denied. We will, however, instruct the members of the jury to return and to make a separate award.” * * * “MR. CRAWFORD: Does the Court rule that the verdict should be against both ? “THE COURT: Yes. “MR. CRAWFORD: I would object, for the record, to that ruling.” * * * “(Proceedings in open court were then resumed.) “THE COURT: Mr. Foreman and ladies and gentlemen of the jury: we perhaps did not make it clear to you that there are to be separate verdicts, one for compensatory and one for punitive * * * damages. “* * * [R]eturn to the jury room and make a determination * * * that would be (a) compensatory damages * * *; and (b) exemplary damages * * *.” * * * [The jury returned at 5:15 P.M.] “THE COURT: Mr. Foreman and ladies and gentlemen of the jury: the Court has earlier directed a verdiet for the plaintiff Mr. Yankey, ²⁴¹ against * * * Mr. Ivan Jordan.

We now direct the clerk to take your verdict in accordance with the Court’s direction. “THE CLERK: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, have you agreed upon a verdict?” * * *