ordinarily awarded in comparable and recent libel/defamation cases, particularly where no proof of actual economic harm was submitted. Cf. Tusino v. Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters, 169 Fed.Appx. 39 (2d Cir.2006) (reducing emotional damages award for libel from $250,000 to $100,000 where there was no medical or other objective evidence of plaintiffs damages, only plaintiffs and daughter’s testimony regarding embarrassment, loss of sleep, weight and 'appetite); Bach v. First Union-Nat’l Bank, 149 Fed.Appx. 354 (6th Cir.2005) (upholding award of $400,000 compensatory damages in Fair Credit Reporting Act case involv ing emotional distress where there was also a showing of actual damages in the form of denial of two credit applications); Stamathis v. Flying J, Inc., 389 F.3d 429 (4th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>); Simon, 895 F.2d at 1319-20 (remitting
holding that defendants admission in open court that there was probable cause for issuance of an indictment against him barred him from later bringing malicious prosecution action against his accuser holding that a compensatory damages award of 250000 to truck driver and against merchant for defamation and malicious prosecution was not excessive under virginia law where the plaintiff suffered humiliation and embarrassment from being arrested taken into custody and booked for petit larceny due to actions of merchant he faced further insult with respect to his relationship with his employer and he incurred 10000 in actual outofpocket loss and expenses in defending against charge against him holding that in an action for malicious prosecution the plaintiff is entitled to recover damages not only for his unlawful arrest and imprisonment but also for expenses of his defense recognizing a charge of common law grand larceny as the basis of an action for malicious prosecution recognizing the abolition of common law petit larceny with the 1866 enactment of a statute which defined petit larceny as simple larceny of goods below the value of 20