Cited by

In Vratsenes v. New Hampshire Auto, Inc., 112 N.H. 71 (1972), we noted: In a civil action founded on a tort, nothing but compensatory damages can be awarded, but the injured party is entitled to full compensation for all the injury sustained, mental as well as material.

Enhanced compensatory damages are, as their name indicates, compensatory and not punitive in nature.

RSA 382-A:1-106(1) (1961); RSA 507:16 (Supp. 1993); Vratsenes v. N.H. Auto, Inc., 112 N.H. 71, 73, 289 A.2d 66, 68 (1972).

Thus, the second consideration supporting the verdict is the rule in Vratsenes v. N.H. Auto, Inc., 112 N.H. 71, 73, *589 289 A.2d 66, 68 (1972), that in tort actions for “wanton, malicious, or oppressive” conduct, damages may be enhanced to reflect “the aggravating circumstances.” The trial court instructed the jury that they could award enhanced, though not punitive, damages, and the jury obviously availed themselves of thei

“However, when the act involved is wanton, malicious, or oppressive, the compensatory damages awarded may reflect the aggravating circumstances.” Vratsenes v. N.H. Auto, Inc., 112 N.H. 71, 73, 289 A.2d 66, 68 (1972).

In order to recover for enhanced compensatory damages, it must be shown that the defendant’s act was oppressive, wanton and malicious.

Liberal compensatory damages, which include damages for mental suffering, will be awarded in tort actions, however, when the acts complained of were wanton, malicious, or oppressive.

In other words, no damages other than compensatory are to be awarded.” Vratsenes v. N.H. Auto, Inc., 112 N.H. 71, 73, 289 A.2d 66, 68 (1972); accord Munson v. Raudonis, 118 N.H. 474, 479, 387 A.2d 1174, 1177 (1978).

The defendant finally argues that the award to the plaintiff of the amount of interest that she has to pay on the loan which she took out in order to secure a new residence is in the nature of penal or punitive damages and should therefore be set aside.

As support for this contention, the plaintiff relies on Vratsenes v. New Hampshire Auto, Inc., 112 N.H. 71, 289 A.2d 66 (1972).

We therefore reject defendants’ argument that the damages awarded were penal or punitive in nature.

Punitive or Exemplary Damages Both parties agree that the law of this State does not allow a defendant to be punished by being held liable for punitive or exemplary damages.

However, when the act involved is wanton, malicious, or oppressive, the compensatory damages awarded may reflect the aggravating circumstances.” *851 Vratsenes v. N.H. Auto, Inc., 112 N.H. 71, 73, 289 A.2d 66, 68 (1972).

On this evidence the jury could find not only the usual elements of compensatory damages for this trespass, but also that defendant Ciborowski committed this trespass deliberately and that “the act involved is wanton, malicious, or oppressive”, thus allowing the compensatory damages to “reflect the aggravating circumstances.” Vratsenes v. N.H. Auto, Inc., 112 N.H. 71, 73, 289 A.2d 66, 68 (1972).