Also known as:loss compensations · compensation for loss
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
2 senses
1
A principle allowing a party forced by another's tort to sue or defend against a third person to recover reasonable compensation for attorney fees, loss of time, and other expenditures incurred in the earlier action.
2
A rationale for spousal support under which one spouse makes compensatory payments to the other to offset specific economic losses the recipient spouse incurred during the marriage.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
Sense 1
1
Sense 1
A principle allowing a party forced by another's tort to sue or defend against a third person to recover reasonable compensation for attorney fees, loss of time, and other expenditures incurred in the earlier action.
Examples1
Attorney Fee Recovery After Third-Party Suit
Lena Lawson discovered that Lexicon Media had published defamatory statements about her business practices. To protect her interests she sued a third-party distributor that had repeated the statements. After prevailing in that action Lena sought recovery from Lexicon Media for the attorney fees and lost time she incurred in the earlier suit. The court awarded her reasonable compensation for those expenditures because Lexicon Media's tort had forced her to litigate against the distributor.
Sense 2
2
Sense 2
A rationale for spousal support under which one spouse makes compensatory payments to the other to offset specific economic losses the recipient spouse incurred during the marriage.
Examples1
Spousal Support Based on Marital Losses
Leah Lamb left her career to manage the household and support Levi Lowe's professional advancement during their marriage. After divorce Leah sought spousal support framed as loss compensation for the career opportunities she had forgone. The court ordered compensatory payments to offset the economic losses she sustained while contributing to the marriage.
Hitaffer v. Argonne Co.183 F.2d 811 (D.C. Cir. 1950)
The appellant’s husband was employed by appellee Argonne Co., Inc. While in the course of that employment he sustained severe and permanent injuries to his body and in particular in and about his abdomen.
As a direct consequence of those injuries the appellant was deprived of her husband’s aid, assistance, and enjoyment, specifically including sexual relations. The husband thereafter received compensation for his injuries pursuant to the provisions of the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, the workmen’s compensation statute for the District of Columbia.
Subsequently the wife filed the present action against the employer. The defendant moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the court lacked jurisdiction and that the complaint failed to state a cause of action.
The motion was granted and judgment was entered for the appellee. The wife appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which heard the case on the record of the proceedings below.
How does loss compensation differ from traditional alimony rationales?
Loss compensation focuses on reimbursing specific economic losses one spouse experienced during the marriage rather than on fault or ongoing need. It treats spousal support as payment for those losses instead of a continuation of marital support obligations.
183 F.2d 811 (D.C. Cir. 1950)
…in his action. There remains of course the important fact that the husband is under the duty to support his wife, so that any compensation for loss of earning power paid to him goes indirectly to benefit her, while the wife is under no corresponding duty. This must necessarily be taken into account in any determination of her damages.…
Real PropertyOwnership of real property · Fair housing/discriminationNEXTGENFoundational