Nominal Damages in California: When You Can Win a Case but Recover $1

“Nominal damages” are a specific kind of court-awarded damages that come up when someone proves a legal wrong happened, but can’t show meaningful, measurable financial loss. In California, nominal damages most often appear in cases involving certain intentional torts and civil rights–type claims, and they can matter far more than the tiny dollar amount suggests.

Quick decision factors: Is a nominal damages claim likely in your situation?

• You can prove a legal violation (a right was infringed) but your actual losses are hard to quantify.
• Liability is clear, but there’s limited evidence of medical bills, repair costs, wage loss, or other economic damages.
• The harm is primarily non-economic (e.g., an invasion of rights or dignity), and the law allows a finding of liability without proof of specific dollar loss.
• You need a formal judicial finding—a judgment establishing that the defendant was in the wrong—more than you need compensation.
• There’s a dispute about “actual damages” (compensatory damages), and the defense argues you can’t prove causation or amount.
• Punitive damages might be in play in certain fact patterns (often requiring an underlying tort and proof of malice/oppression/fraud), but compensatory damages are uncertain.
• Attorney’s fees could matter in some claims where statutes allow fee-shifting, even if damages are nominal (this is claim-specific and not automatic).
• In a personal injury setting, your losses may exist but documentation is missing—making the case look “nominal” when it shouldn’t be.

What are nominal damages?

Nominal damages are a small, symbolic sum of money awarded to a plaintiff who proves that the defendant committed a legal wrong, but the plaintiff did not prove substantial, compensable harm in dollars. The concept is: the law recognizes the violation, even if there’s no proven financial impact.

In practice, nominal damages are often a token amount (commonly $1), but the precise amount is less important than what the award represents: a finding of liability and a judgment for the plaintiff.

Nominal vs. compensatory vs. punitive damages

• Compensatory damages: Intended to repay actual losses. In a California personal injury case, this often includes medical expenses, lost wages, loss of earning capacity, property damage, and pain and suffering (non-economic damages).
• Nominal damages: A minimal sum awarded when a wrong is proven but substantial loss is not proven.
• Punitive damages: Intended to punish and deter especially wrongful conduct (not available in every case and usually requires a higher showing such as malice, oppression, or fraud).

Why nominal damages can still matter (even when the money is tiny)

If nominal damages are so small, why do people care? Because a nominal damages award can have real-world consequences:

• It confirms fault. The court formally recognizes that the defendant violated a legal duty or right.
• It can support injunctive or declaratory relief in the right type of case (orders to stop conduct or declare rights), depending on the claim and facts.
• It can affect litigation posture. A defendant who expected a defense verdict may face a plaintiff’s judgment instead.
• It may impact costs and fees in certain cases, especially where a statute provides for attorney’s fees to the prevailing party (not typical in standard auto-accident injury claims).
• It clarifies legal rights. Sometimes the point is not the reimbursement, but the principle—establishing that conduct was unlawful.

When nominal damages typically come up in California

Nominal damages are more common in cases where the violation itself is the core harm, and proof of dollars-and-cents loss is not required to establish liability. Examples can include:

• Intentional torts where a technical invasion occurs (depending on the claim and proof).
• Certain constitutional or civil rights claims where a right is violated but measurable damages are minimal or hard to prove.
• Some contract-related disputes (outside personal injury) where breach is proven but actual damages are not proven.

In a classic California personal injury case (car crash, slip and fall, dog bite), the goal is usually compensatory damages. But nominal damages can become a focal point if the defense argues the plaintiff cannot prove causation, severity, or documented loss—or if the incident caused a legal wrong with minimal provable injury.

Eligibility: What must be shown to obtain nominal damages?

While the exact requirements vary by claim, nominal damages generally require:

• Duty/Right + Violation: You must prove the defendant violated a legal duty (negligence) or infringed a protected right (intentional tort/rights claim).
• Liability elements met: All elements of the cause of action must be proven (for example, conduct, lack of consent, causation where required).
• Failure to prove actual damages amount: You either suffered no quantifiable harm, or you cannot establish the amount of compensable loss with adequate evidence.

Key point: nominal damages are not a substitute for weak proof

Nominal damages aren’t meant to “rescue” a case that fails on liability. If you can’t prove the defendant did something legally wrong, nominal damages typically won’t apply. They come into play when the wrong is proven but the measurable impact is not.

Common exceptions and limitations (where nominal damages may not help)

• Claims that require proof of actual damages: Some causes of action require actual damages as an element. If actual damages are required and not proven, the claim may fail entirely rather than result in nominal damages.
• Where causation is missing: If the defendant’s conduct did not cause the claimed harm (or causation is too speculative), the court may not award even nominal damages, depending on the claim.
• Where the remedy is primarily equitable: Some cases focus on injunctive relief. Nominal damages may be available, but the strategy and proof differ from money-damages cases.

What changes outcomes: the evidence that keeps a case from becoming “nominal”

In California injury cases, what often separates meaningful compensatory damages from a nominal outcome is documentation and consistency. If you were genuinely hurt or financially impacted, the objective is usually to prove:

• Medical causation (the incident caused the injury) through records and provider notes.
• Severity and duration through follow-up care, imaging when appropriate (e.g., X-ray, MRI), and treatment history.
• Economic losses with receipts, bills, wage documentation, and employment records.
• Non-economic impact (pain, limitations, disruption to daily activities) supported by consistent reporting and credible testimony.

Decision checklist (use this to estimate whether “nominal damages” is the likely endgame)

If/Then guidance: how nominal damages fits your next decision

If you can prove the defendant violated a legal duty/right but you cannot prove measurable losses, then ask whether the goal is a judgment, a change in conduct, or principle—because compensation may be minimal.

If you have medical treatment, bills, wage loss, or other concrete impacts, then the focus should be on proving compensatory damages with documentation so the case does not get framed as “only nominal.”

If the insurance company is denying injury or disputing causation, then expect pressure to accept a low-value resolution unless you can tie the injury to the incident through records, timelines, and credible testimony.

If your case involves an intentional wrong or a statutory claim where attorney’s fees may be available, then nominal damages might still be strategically important—but it depends on the specific claim and what the law allows.

How insurers and defendants argue for “zero or nominal” damages

In many California claims, the fight is not only about what happened, but what it caused. Common defense themes include:

• “No injury” / “gap in treatment”: Delays in seeking care are used to argue symptoms were minor or unrelated.
• Pre-existing condition: They may concede an incident occurred but argue your pain comes from degenerative changes or old injuries.
• Minimal property damage = minimal injury: Especially in low-impact auto collisions, insurers argue that vehicle damage does not support significant bodily injury (this is not always medically accurate, but it is a common argument).
• Subjective complaints only: They may discount pain without objective findings, ignoring that many real injuries have limited imaging findings.
• Inconsistent statements: Differences between what you told police, doctors, and the insurer can be used to attack credibility.

How courts view the gap between “a wrong happened” and “you proved damages”

California civil cases generally require a plaintiff to prove damages with evidence—especially when seeking compensatory damages. A nominal damages award may reflect the court’s conclusion that:

• the plaintiff met the burden on liability (or on a right being violated), but
• the plaintiff did not meet the burden to establish the amount of compensable loss.

This can happen when documentation is missing, when causation is disputed, or when the claimed harm is inherently hard to quantify. In injury claims, it’s a reminder that treatment records, billing records, and wage evidence often make the difference.

Example scenario (hypothetical)

Hypothetical: A driver runs a red light and clips another vehicle at low speed. The at-fault driver admits fault at the scene. The other driver feels soreness but does not seek medical care for several months. Later, they file a claim stating they had ongoing neck pain and missed a few days of work but they no longer have pay stubs, did not report missed time to their employer, and have no medical records tying symptoms to the collision.

Even though fault may be clear, the defense argues there is no доказable injury or wage loss. If the factfinder believes a legal wrong occurred (negligence) but finds the plaintiff did not prove actual damages with credible evidence, the outcome could be a defense-friendly result—potentially including a finding of liability with only nominal damages (or no recovery, depending on the claim and proof).

Contrast: If the same person promptly documented symptoms, obtained an evaluation, followed through with treatment, and preserved wage documentation, the case would be far more likely to be assessed as compensatory—medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering—rather than nominal.

Practical steps to avoid a “nominal damages” outcome in an injury claim

• Seek timely medical evaluation if you are injured, and accurately describe symptoms and how the incident happened.
• Follow the treatment plan and keep appointments; gaps can be used against you.
• Keep every bill and receipt related to the incident (prescriptions, co-pays, assistive devices, mileage logs if relevant).
• Document time missed from work and reduced duties. Ask your employer for a written wage verification if needed.
• Save evidence early: photos, videos, incident reports, witness contact information, and property damage documentation.
• Be consistent across statements to police, medical providers, and insurers. Inconsistencies can reduce credibility.
• Be careful with recorded statements to insurers; misunderstandings can become admissions.

How nominal damages relate to settlements and litigation strategy

Nominal damages are most directly relevant in litigation, because they are a type of court award. In settlement discussions, however, the concept shows up as leverage: one side argues the case has real compensatory value; the other argues it’s worth little because damages can’t be proven.

In California claims, the move from “nominal/low value” to “fair compensatory value” is usually driven by:

• Clear liability evidence (police report, admissions, video, credible witnesses)
• Medical causation evidence (timely treatment, consistent history, provider assessments)
• Economic loss documentation (wages, employment impact, out-of-pocket costs)
• Credibility and consistency (deposition testimony, medical histories, prior claims context)

FAQ

Are nominal damages the same as “pain and suffering”?

Answer: No. Pain and suffering are non-economic compensatory damages meant to address real harm; nominal damages are a token amount recognizing a legal wrong when substantial damages are not proven.

Can you get nominal damages in a California car accident case?

Answer: It’s possible in theory, but most auto cases focus on compensatory damages. Nominal damages become relevant if liability is proven but injury and losses are not proven with adequate evidence.

Do nominal damages mean you “won” the case?

Answer: Usually yes in the sense of liability—you obtained a judgment recognizing wrongdoing. But it also means the factfinder did not award meaningful compensation.

Can nominal damages lead to punitive damages?

Answer: Sometimes, depending on the claim and proof. Punitive damages have specific requirements and are not available in ordinary negligence cases; they typically require proof of heightened misconduct.

Do nominal damages automatically make the other side pay attorney’s fees?

Answer: No. Attorney’s fees depend on statutes or contracts that authorize fee-shifting, and results vary by claim type and circumstances.

What’s the difference between nominal damages and “zero damages”?

Answer: Nominal damages are a small monetary award acknowledging a proven legal wrong. “Zero damages” generally means the plaintiff failed to obtain any monetary award—often because liability, causation, or damages were not proven.

Talk to a California personal injury lawyer about what your damages evidence supports

If you’re concerned your claim could be minimized as “no injury” or “only nominal,” it can help to have a lawyer review the facts, documentation, and causation issues. For California personal injury matters, you can contact Jacob Emrani through CallJacob.com to discuss what evidence typically strengthens a damages claim and what to expect from the process. No outcome can be promised, and every case turns on its specific facts.

Disclaimer: This article provides general educational information about nominal damages and related concepts in California civil cases. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice about your situation, consult a qualified attorney.