## Facts

- Hazel Meiter contracted to purchase Frank Cavanaugh’s home; Cavanaugh could remain as a renter for up to six weeks after delivery of the deed.
- The deed was delivered April 12, 1973; Cavanaugh’s right to remain ended May 25, 1973, and Meiter was entitled to exclusive possession May 26.
- When Meiter sought possession in late May/early June so her recently widowed daughter-in-law could move in, Cavanaugh refused to leave and became belligerent.
- Cavanaugh made derogatory and threatening remarks, including telling Meiter she could move furniture into a “shanty” and later “roll it down the hill,” and stating he was an attorney who would move “when I’m damn well ready.”
- Cavanaugh referred to Meiter, who was recovering from cancer surgery and visibly bandaged, as a “sick old woman.”
- On June 7, 1973, Cavanaugh sent a letter implying personal influence with the local court and suggesting the court might “break” the contract.
- Meiter bought another home for her daughter-in-law due to the delayed possession.
- Cavanaugh vacated in early July 1973, leaving broken windows and other damage; Meiter incurred repair costs and later sold the home at a loss.
- A jury awarded Meiter $5,500 in actual damages and $10,000 in exemplary damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress by outrageous conduct.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence, viewed most favorably to Meiter, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case of intentional infliction of emotional distress by outrageous conduct, defeating motions for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s awards of actual damages and exemplary damages.

## Decision

- The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment for Meiter.
- The court held the evidence permitted a jury to find Cavanaugh’s conduct extreme and outrageous when considered as a whole.
- The court held the record supported the $5,500 actual damages award.
- The court held the record supported the $10,000 exemplary damages award based on willful and wanton conduct.
- The trial court properly denied Cavanaugh’s motions for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict.

## Legal Principles

- On review of denial of a directed verdict or judgment notwithstanding the verdict, the evidence is considered in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.
- Intentional infliction of emotional distress requires conduct so extreme and outrageous that it exceeds all bounds tolerated by a civilized community; when the evidence could support such a finding, the question is for the jury.
- Conduct tied to a contractual dispute may support liability in tort where the defendant’s behavior includes coercive or humiliating acts that, in context, are sufficiently extreme.
- Exemplary damages require proof of willful and wanton conduct; the same facts establishing outrageous conduct may also support the mental state required for exemplary damages.

## Conclusion

The court upheld a jury verdict finding that an attorney-seller’s refusal to surrender possession after closing, combined with insulting and intimidating statements and an implication of special court influence, provided sufficient evidence of outrageous conduct and willful and wanton behavior to support both compensatory and exemplary damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress.


Meiter v. Cavanaugh, 580 P.2d 399 (Colo. App. 1978)