Pa. Cons. Stat. » 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. (JUDICIARY) / Chapter 83
Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8353 (2026)

 Damages.

✓ current as of May 2026
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 8353.  Damages.

When the essential elements of an action brought pursuant to this subchapter have been established as provided in section 8351 (relating to wrongful use of civil proceedings), the plaintiff is entitled to recover for the following:

(1)  The harm normally resulting from any arrest or imprisonment, or any dispossession or interference with the advantageous use of his land, chattels or other things, suffered by him during the course of the proceedings.

(2)  The harm to his reputation by any defamatory matter alleged as the basis of the proceedings.

(3)  The expense, including any reasonable attorney fees, that he has reasonably incurred in defending himself against the proceedings.

(4)  Any specific pecuniary loss that has resulted from the proceedings.

(5)  Any emotional distress that is caused by the proceedings.

(6)  Punitive damages according to law in appropriate cases.

 

Cross References.  Section 8353 is referred to in section 8354 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1993–2022 · leading case: Villani v. Seibert Appeal of: Seibert, 159 A.3d 478 (Pa. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Villani v. Seibert Appeal of: Seibert, 159 A.3d 478 (Pa. 2017). · cites it 4× “42 Pa.C.S. § 8353. The plaintiff must show that the underlying proceedings were terminated in his or her favor and that the attorney (or other person) acted “in a grossly negligent manner or without probable cause” and “primarily for a purpose other than that of securing the…”
Stone Crushed P'ship v. Kassab Archbold Jackson & O'Brien, 908 A.2d 875 (Pa. 2006). · cites it 2× “42 Pa.C.S. § 8353. [2] For clarification, it is important to note that Jackson used a disinterested person, an associate of KAJO, Kevin E.”
Thunberg v. Strause, 682 A.2d 295 (Pa. 1996). · cites it 2× “§ 8352 (a person lacks probable cause if he does not reasonably believe that certain facts exist or that the claim is valid based upon those facts); 42 Pa.C.S. § 8353 (damages for wrongful use of civil proceeding may include, but are not limited to, any specific pecuniary loss…”
Freundlich & Litman, LLC v. Feierstein, E., 157 A.3d 526 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017). “Additionally, this statute allows a plaintiff to seek recovery for, inter alia, “[t]he harm to his [or her] reputation by any defamatory matter alleged as the basis of the proceedings^]” 42 Pa.C.S. § 8353(2). Here, Appellants argue that “[t]he trial court erred and abused its…”
Perelman, J. v. Perelman, R., 125 A.3d 1259 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015). “” 42 Pa.C.S. § 8353. 3 . Jeffrey urges this Court to affirm without addressing the substantive merits of Dil-worth’s preliminary objections upon the basis that Dilworth should have presented its collateral estoppel defense in a pleading as new matter under Pa.”
Ludmer v. Nernberg, 640 A.2d 939 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1994). “Nernberg makes the audacious assertion that the trial court’s instruction that the jury consider both Nernberg’s net worth and his financial status was in violation of an earlier order of Judge Musmanno “dated January 3, 1992, which held that only Nernberg’s net worth would be…”
Bannar v. Miller, 701 A.2d 242 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1997). “42 Pa.C.S. § 8353. In Shelton v. Evans, 292 Pa.”
Ciolli v. Iravani, 625 F. Supp. 2d 276 (E.D. Pa. 2009). “42 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. § 8353. The Complaint alleges that Ciolli retained a lawyer, Randazza, who attempted to take part in the August 7, 2007 meeting in Philadelphia and who contacted Defendants Lemley and Keker & Van Nest on at least one occasion (Compl.”
Gentzler v. Atlee, 660 A.2d 1378 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1995). “42 Pa.C.S. § 8353. 4 . This part of the probable cause definition is irrelevant since Gentzler’s action is brought against counsel and not against John Doe himself.”
Cannon v. Sheller, 825 F. Supp. 722 (E.D. Pa. 1993). “42 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. § 8353 further provides that, where the essential elements of an action under § 8351 have been established, the plaintiff is entitled to recover for the following: (1) The harm normally resulting from any arrest or imprisonment, or any dispossession or…”
Wallach v. Stradley, Ronon, Stevens & Young, 1996 Phila. Cty. Rptr. LEXIS 21 (1996). “” 42 Pa. C.S. §8353(6). The issue of punitive damages was submitted to the jury separately, only after they had already returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff on issues of liability and compensatory damages.”
Aiyegbusi v. Nkansah (E.D. Pa. 2022). · cites it 2× “13, 2009) (citing 42 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. § 8353). Of particular concern to Nkansah is Aiyegbusi’s claims of punitive damages and reputational harm.”
Show all 17 citing cases →
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8353(2) — 2 cases
Villani v. Seibert Appeal of: Seibert, 159 A.3d 478 (Pa. 2017). “42 Pa.C.S. § 8353. The plaintiff must show that the underlying proceedings were terminated in his or her favor and that the attorney (or other person) acted “in a grossly negligent manner or without probable cause” and “primarily for a purpose other than that of securing the…”
Freundlich & Litman, LLC v. Feierstein, E., 157 A.3d 526 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017). “Additionally, this statute allows a plaintiff to seek recovery for, inter alia, “[t]he harm to his [or her] reputation by any defamatory matter alleged as the basis of the proceedings^]” 42 Pa.C.S. § 8353(2). Here, Appellants argue that “[t]he trial court erred and abused its…”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8353(3) — 1 case
Morello v. Anastasio, 24 Pa. D. & C.5th 376 (2011).
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8353(6) — 3 cases
Villani v. Seibert Appeal of: Seibert, 159 A.3d 478 (Pa. 2017). “42 Pa.C.S. § 8353. The plaintiff must show that the underlying proceedings were terminated in his or her favor and that the attorney (or other person) acted “in a grossly negligent manner or without probable cause” and “primarily for a purpose other than that of securing the…”
Ludmer v. Nernberg, 640 A.2d 939 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1994). “Nernberg makes the audacious assertion that the trial court’s instruction that the jury consider both Nernberg’s net worth and his financial status was in violation of an earlier order of Judge Musmanno “dated January 3, 1992, which held that only Nernberg’s net worth would be…”
Wallach v. Stradley, Ronon, Stevens & Young, 1996 Phila. Cty. Rptr. LEXIS 21 (1996). “” 42 Pa. C.S. §8353(6). The issue of punitive damages was submitted to the jury separately, only after they had already returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff on issues of liability and compensatory damages.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.