Stigma And Stigma Of Stigma Damages

2060 WordsDec 16, 20149 Pages
With stigma damages, they are usually awarded with some common law theories such as trespass, nuisance, and negligence. These theories will be discussed later on. Plaintiffs have used these to recover when there is an actual contamination. Stigma refers to perception. So usually, it’s not when an actual event has occurred. In this context, we are talking about contamination. Stigma damages usually refers to damages of negative perceptions that deal with contamination. Courts award stigma damages with other types of relief as mentioned above. There is a lot of controversy associated with stigma damages because of what stigma represents. Because it’s all about perceptions, the damages are not the actual physical damages, like contamination,…show more content…
Supp. 2d 969 (D.Wyo. 1998). Based on another case, Pflanz v. Foster, 888 N.E.2d 756 (Ind. 2008), stigma damages are usually available to the property owner when they “can demonstrate that an imperfect market rendered her property less valuable after remediation of environmental contamination, despite complete restoration.” Not all restoration can restore the damage that was allegedly done to the property. However, it is hard to establish that the contamination is to devalue the property significantly. In Metuchen I, LLC v. Borough of Metuchen, 21 N.J.Tax 283, it was hard for experts to show that property tax value was diminished due to environmental contamination. But one expert was able to show that you could combine stigma with clean up costs. Aside from the diminution of property value, another fear property owners have about the contamination to their property is the fear of future illness. In order to claim for an increased risk, the plaintiff has to show a physical injury that has occurred already or a future injury of a disease or condition due to future contamination. However, sometimes it is hard for a plaintiff to show all this because usually the injury is based on speculative claims. A plaintiff would most likely have to prove an excess of 50 percent that there is a risk of injury. Ayers v. Jackson (1987) 106 N.J. 557, 525 A2d. 287, 307. Associated to this fear of future illness with stigma damages is medical monitoring damages. It can be argued
Open Document