Kramer v. Ricksmeier - 159 Iowa 48, 139 N.W. 1091 (1913)

Rule:

A telephone communication ordering plaintiff to take care of her husband's cattle which were on defendant's premises, although in such violent language as to cause plaintiff, who was recovering from sickness, great bodily and mental pain and anguish, will not support a recovery of damages therefore, because too remote, speculative and improbable. Nor can the action be maintained on the theory of assault; as mere words, though directly spoken, do not constitute an assault.

Facts:

Plaintiff injured party had filed a complaint against defendant neighbor for damages for bodily pain and mental anguish that allegedly resulted from a telephone conversation that she had with defendant. Plaintiff alleged that the defendant, in ordering her to take care of her husband’s cattle which were on defendant’s premises, had used violent and profane language against her with the intent to provoke and injure her. The trial court did not so find, and rendered a judgment in the defendant’s favor. Plaintiff appealed. 

Issue:

Did the plaintiff’s complaint set forth a sufficient cause of action for the claim of damages for bodily pain and mental anguish? 

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

On appeal, the court affirmed the trial court's judgment. The court held that the claims that were set forth in the plaintiff’s complaint were too speculative, remote, and improbable to furnish a basis for an action of damages. Further, the court held that the complaint could not be sustained on the theory of an assault because mere words could not constitute an assault. The court found that the defendant had only talked with the plaintiff over the telephone for the purpose of imparting to her the truthful information regarding the cattle, and he was well within his rights to do so. The court concluded that the complaint had not set forth a sufficient cause of action for the claim of damages for bodily pain and mental anguish.