Gonzales v. Personal Storage, Inc.

For many years, Lucy Gonzales (plaintiff) was married to a United States naval officer, during which time she collected rare and valuable items. In 1989, Gonzales divorced, the family home was sold, and Gonzales was required to store her rare furniture, keepsakes, heirlooms, and personal belongings in a rental facility operated by Personal Storage, Inc. (defendant). Gonzales informed Personal Storage of her personal circumstances and the items she needed to store. The parties entered a lease agreement, under which Gonzales owed monthly rent. Between 1990 and 1991, Gonzales got into a pattern of falling behind on paying rent, which she would pay in full after receiving a notice from Personal Storage. In January 1992, when Gonzales was behind on rent, Personal Storage placed an advertisement for an auction of Gonzales’s personal goods without notifying Gonzales. The advertisement contained a detailed description of the items stored in Gonzales’s unit, including rare furniture, household items, ethnic and cultural items, and personal memorabilia. The replacement value of the items was approximately $196,000. After Personal Storage had placed the advertisement, an imposter posing as Gonzales tendered the amount of rent that was owed to Personal Storage and was allowed to remove all the stored items from Gonzales’s unit. Shortly thereafter, Gonzales paid her rent in full. Personal Storage realized its mistake and told Gonzales what had happened. Gonzales was emotionally devastated from losing her belongings, and she became clinically depressed. Gonzales sued Personal Storage alleging negligence and conversion, among other claims. The trial court directed a verdict in Gonzales’s favor. As to negligence, the jury awarded $59,559 in property damage and $232,582 in emotional-distress damages. As to conversion, the jury awarded $87,466 in damages. The jury was not instructed that it could award emotional-distress damages as to the conversion claim. Personal Storage appealed on the sole ground that Gonzales was not entitled to recover emotional-distress damages.