With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". of life, we have made clear that the damages to a particular plaintiff in a personal injury action should be decided on a case-by-case basis. Kinnard v. Martin, 223 So.2d 300, 302 (Miss.1969); Mobile & Ohio R.R. v. Carpenter, 104 Miss. 706, 61 So. 693 (1913); Southern R.R. v. Kendrick, 40 Miss. 374 (1866). We allowed recovery for all damages including those for partial loss of enjoyment of life in W.J. Runyon & Son, Inc. v. Davis, 605 So.2d 38, 50 (Miss.1992). This Court has also recognized damages for the loss of enjoyment of life in a number of other personal injury cases. See Flight Line, Inc. v. Tanksley, 608 So.2d 1149, 1163 (Miss.1992) (recognized loss of enjoyment of life as a factor in determining jury award); General Motors Corp. v. Jackson, 636 So.2d 310, 315 (Miss.1994) (<HOLDING>); Atwood v. Lever, 274 So.2d 146, 149

A: holding that claimants may be entitled to damages for loss of use and enjoyment in addition to returned rents and profits
B: holding that proof of loss is not evidence of extent of loss and insured is not precluded from showing his damages were greater than shown in proof of loss
C: holding award that included damages for loss of enjoyment of life not excessive
D: holding a court may not award punitive damages
C.