Editing Damages (section)

== Nominal damages ==

Nominal damages are very small damages awarded to show that the loss or harm suffered was technical rather than actual. Perhaps the most famous nominal damages award in modern times has been the $1 verdict against the [[National Football League]] (NFL) in the [[United States Football League#USFL v. NFL lawsuit|1986 antitrust suit]] prosecuted by the [[United States Football League]]. Although the verdict was automatically [[Treble damages|trebled]] pursuant to [[antitrust law in the United States]], the resulting $3 judgment was regarded as a victory for the NFL. Historically, one of the best known nominal damage awards was the [[Farthing (British coin)|farthing]] that the [[jury]] awarded to [[James McNeill Whistler|James Whistler]] in his libel suit against [[John Ruskin]]. In the English jurisdiction, nominal damages are generally fixed at £5.<ref>{{Cite book|last=McBride, Bagshaw|title=Tort Law|publisher=Pearson|year=2018|edition=6|pages=784}}</ref>

Many times a party that has been wronged but is not able to prove significant damages will sue for nominal damages. This is particularly common in cases involving alleged violations of constitutional rights, such as freedom of speech. Until 2021, in the United States, there was a circuit split as to whether nominal damages may be used if a constitutional violation had occurred but has since been rendered [[mootness|moot]].<ref>{{cite web | url = https://www.reuters.com/article/us-otc-mootness-idUSKCN1B42F2 | title = Come for the sex toys. Stay for the newly created circuit split on mootness | first=  Alison | last = Frankel | date = August 24, 2017 | access-date = January 11, 2021 | publisher = [[Reuters]] }}</ref> The Supreme Court decided 8–1 in the 2021 case ''[[Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski]]'' that nominal damages are appropriate means to redress violated rights otherwise now rendered moot.<ref>{{cite web | url = https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/12/us/supreme-court-taylor-swift.html | title = Citing Taylor Swift, Supreme Court Seems Set to Back Nominal Damages Suits | first = Adam | last = Liptak | date = January 12, 2021 | access-date = January 12, 2021 | work = [[The New York Times]] }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url = https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/supreme-court-sides-christian-students-silenced-georgia-campus/story?id=76320592 | title = Supreme Court sides with Christian students silenced on Georgia campus  |first = Devin | last = Dewer | date = March 8, 2021 | access-date = March 8, 2021 | work = [[ABC News (United States)|ABC News]] }}</ref>

=== Contemptuous damages ===

Contemptuous damages are a form of damage award available in some jurisdictions. They are similar to nominal damages awards, as they are given when the plaintiff's suit is trivial, used only to settle a point of honor or law.<ref>{{cite web|title=Contemptuous damages|url=http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095634713|website=Oxford Reference|publisher=Oxford University Press|access-date=19 September 2017}}</ref> Awards are usually of the smallest amount, usually 1 cent or similar. The key distinction is that in jurisdictions that follow the loser-pays for attorney fees, the claimant in a contemptuous damages case may be required to pay their own attorney fees.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Oliphant|first1=Ken|last2=Lunney|first2=Mark|title=Tort Law: Text and Materials|date=2008|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford, England|isbn=978-0199211364|page=865|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9bUUcu9c7LcC}}</ref>

Traditionally, the court awarded the smallest coin in the Realm, which in England was one farthing, 1/960 of a pound before decimalisation in the 1970s.  [[Court costs]] are not awarded.<ref>{{cite book|last=Spetz|first=Steven E|title=Can I Sue? An Introduction to Canadian Tort Law|year=1974|publisher=Pitman|location=Toronto|isbn=0-273-04189-4|page=219|chapter=Civil Court Procedure And Remedies For Tort}}</ref>