Law Commons^™

Closing The Door On Human Dignity: How The Supreme Court Blocked The Path To Relief For Victims Of Title Ix Discrimination, Bailey Wylie

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

This comment exposes the far-reaching consequences of Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller and scrutinizes the Supreme Court’s reliance on contract law principles to deny victims of discrimination recovery of non-economic damages.

For almost 50 years, courts have awarded emotional distress damages to victims of discrimination. Consequently, the Court’s lack of notice argument within Cummings falls flat through a cursory analysis of precedent. In the context of Title IX discrimination, school districts are undeniably aware of the possibility of sexual harassment liability at the time they accept federal funding. Mandated Codes of Conduct explicitly prohibit sexual harassment and outline ramifications for …

Precise Punishment: Why Precise Punitive Damage Requests Result In Higher Awards Than Round Requests, Michael Conklin

Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review

Imagine a setting where someone asks two people what the temperature is outside. The first person says it is 80 °F, while the second person says it is 78.7 °F. Research regarding precise versus round cognitive anchoring suggests that the second person is more likely to be believed. This is because it is human nature to assume that if someone gives a precise answer, he must have good reason for doing so. This principle remains constant in a variety of settings, including used car negotiations, eBay transactions, and estimating the field goal percentage of a basketball player.

This Article reports …

Transnational Punitive And Compensatory Damages: Villains Or Role Models?, Attilio M. Costabel

St. Thomas Law Review

This Article concludes that the purpose and the scale of the American punitive damages and compensatory damages alike should not be disparaged as excesses of a society spoiled by exaggerated wealth; instead, they should be seen as a model for valuing the universal integrity of human life, while not depending on technicalities of international forum shopping.

The Defamation Injunction Meets The Prior Restraint Doctrine, Doug Rendleman

San Diego Law Review

This article maintains that, under defined circumstances, a judge should be able to grant an injunction that forbids the defendant’s proved defamation. It analyzes the common law of defamation, the constitutional prior restraint doctrine, the constitutional protection for defamation that stems from New York Times v. Sullivan, and injunctions and their enforcement.

In Near v. Minnesota, the Supreme Court expanded protection for expression by adding an injunction to executive licensing as a prior restraint. Although the Near court circumscribed the injunction as a prior restraint, it approved criminal sanctions and damages judgment for defamation. An injunction that forbids the defendant’s …

Hazing Laws In Louisiana: Criminal Penalty Masquerading Under The Guise Of Punitive Damages, Brittney Esie

Journal of Civil Law Studies

No abstract provided.

The Enforcement Of Punitive Damages Awards Between United States And Europe: An Introduction For U.S. Practitioners, Maria Veronica Saladino

The International Lawyer

This article’s objective is to introduce U.S.-based practitioners to European civil-law perspectives on whether U.S. punitive damages awards are enforceable in their jurisdictions. After a brief review concerning the birth of punitive damages within common law, valuable to better understand their cultural and legal significance, this article will outline how the prominent European jurisdictions — France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Switzerland — have dealt with the enforcement of U.S. punitive damages awards. Through each jurisdiction’s policy principles and relevant law, this article aims to afford U.S.-based practitioners initial tips and litigation strategies about how to maximize their chances of enforcing …

Property Law And Civil Procedure--Establishing Precedent For Afha Enforcement And Revising Arkansas's Law On Punitive Damages. Watkins V. Turner, 2016 Ark. App. 158, 2016 Wl 903765, Tasha L. Strickland

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

Punishment But Not A Penalty? Punitive Damages Are Impermissible Under Foreign Substantive Law, Paul A. Hoversten

Michigan Law Review

It is a well-established principle that no court applies the penal laws of another sovereign. But what exactly is a penal law? According to Judge Cardozo, a penal law effects “vindication of the public justice” rather than “reparation to one aggrieved.” Although courts have historically treated punitive damages as a purely civil remedy, that attitude has shifted over time. Modern American punitive damages serve not to compensate the plaintiff but to punish the defendant on behalf of the whole community. Therefore, when courts rely on foreign substantive law to impose punitive damages, they arguably violate the well-established principle that no …

Institutional Liability For Employees’ Intentional Torts: Vicarious Liability As A Quasi-Substitute For Punitive Damages, Catherine M. Sharkey

Valparaiso University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Punitive Damages Revisited: A Statistical Analysis Of How Federal Circuit Courts Decide The Constitutionality Of Such Awards, Hironari Momioka

Cleveland State Law Review

Using data from punitive damages decisions of U.S. federal circuit courts from 2004 to 2012, this paper attempts to establish empirically the following: (1) there is no apparent statistical difference between the levels of jury and judge awards; (2) U.S. Supreme Court decisions such as Philip Morris (2007) or Exxon (2008) do not actually or substantially affect the level of punitive damage awards; (3) with regard to the cases involving remittitur, or reduction of awards, the Exxon decision did not radically affect the decreasing ratio of punitive to compensatory damage awards; (4) as the levels of compensatory awards go up, …

Civil Law Pulsations Along The Latin American Periphery, Ángel R. Oquendo

University of Miami Inter-American Law Review

The civil law system shows its true face as it travels from the Continental European core to the Latin American periphery. Many of the principal institutions have found a home and thrived in the new and radically different environment. One can best study them there by contemplating how they have preserved some of their most basic features despite having transformed themselves into something else.

The notion of the civil law tradition and that of codification have themselves undergone this dialectic of transformation and preservation. So have the traditional approach to contractual interpretation and to third-party agreements and the common proscriptions …

It Is Time For Washington State To Take A Stand Against Holmes's Bad Man: The Value Of Punitive Damages In Deterring Big Business And International Tortfeasors, Jackson Pahlke

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In Washington State, tortfeasors get a break when they commit intentional torts. Instead of receiving more punishment for their planned bad act, intentional tortfeasors are punished as if they committed a mere accident. The trend does not stop in Washington State—nationwide, punitive damage legislation inadequately deters intentional wrongdoers through caps and outright bans on punitive damages. Despite Washington State’s one hundred and twenty-five year ban on punitive damages, it is in a unique and powerful position to change the way courts across the country deal with intentional tortfeasors. Since Washington has never had a comprehensive punitive damages framework, and has …

Digital Photography And The Internet, Rethinking Privacy Law, Jim Barr Coleman

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Why Don’T Punitive Damages Punish Or Deter? Beyond The Constitution Toward An Economic Solution, Paige Griffith

Montana Law Review

No abstract provided.

Adding Insult To Death: Why Punitive Damages Should Not Be Imposed Against A Deceased Tortfeasor's Estate In Ohio, Alec A. Beech

Akron Law Review

A majority of jurisdictions in the United States have determined, either statutorily or judicially, that punitive damages cannot be imposed against deceased tortfeasors. However, a recent Ohio appellate court held to the contrary. In Whetstone v. Binner, the Ohio Fifth District Court of Appeals adopted the minority view when it held that punitive damages could be imposed against a decedent’s estate. This Comment takes the position that Whetstone was incorrectly decided. Specifically, this Comment argues that the longstanding purposes of punitive damages are not furthered when such damages are imposed against estates and that Ohio law supports this conclusion.

The Latest Word From The Supreme Court On Punitive Damages, Leon D. Lazer

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Roots Of Punitive Damages At Common Law: A Longer History, Jason Taliadoros

Cleveland State Law Review

This Article aims to revisit the historical development of the doctrine of exemplary or punitive damages. Punitive damages are anomalous in that they lie in both tort and crime, a matter that has led to much criticism by modern commentators. Yet, a definitive history of punitive damages does not exist to explain this anomaly. The main contribution of this Article, then, is to begin such a history by way of a meta-narrative. It identifies and links the historically significant moments that led to punitive damages, beginning with the background period of classical Roman law, its renewed reception in Western Europe …

Tortious Liability For Bad Faith Refusal To Pay, Jeffrey Schobert

Akron Law Review

In Hoskins v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., the Ohio Supreme Court imposed on insurers a good faith duty in any refusal to pay claims made by their insured. Its decision placed Ohio among a growing number of jurisdictions that have recognized this good faith duty. The court adopted its rationale by relying heavily on existing insurance case law in the refusal-to-settle third-party claims type actions. The court defined the standard of good faith in terms of a reasonable justification by the insurer in refusing to pay a claim "because it believed there was no coverage of the claim." The …

Uninsured Motorist Insurance Now Covers Punitive Award - Hutchinson V. J.C. Penny Casualty Insurance Company, Dale Katzenmeyer

Akron Law Review

A split of authority exists among the few states which have decided the issue In jurisdictions permitting recovery of punitive damages, uninsured motorist coverage is intended to place the insurer in the shoes of the uninsured tortfeasor. Since the insurer stands in the shoes of the tortfeasor, and since punitive damages could be covered if the tortfeasor had his own insurance, it is illogical to deny the victim punitive damages simply because the tortfeasor is uninsured. Other jurisdictions believe that punitive damages should not be awarded since that award would not operate to punish the tortfeasor and would therefore violate …

The Constutionality Of Punitive Damages: Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company V. Cleopatra Haslip, Thomas P. Mannion

Akron Law Review

This Note examines the history of the constitutional challenges to the doctrine of punitive damages. Next, this Note explores the Supreme Court's decision in Haslip. Finally, this Note examines the ramifications of the Haslip decision.

Will Employment Discrimination Class Actions Survive?, Melissa Hart

Akron Law Review

This paper will argue that the changes wrought by the Civil Rights Act of 1991 do not in fact pose a barrier to resolution of employment discrimination claims through class litigation. The addition of compensatory and punitive damages and a jury-trial right in the Civil Rights Act of 1991 may increase the level of scrutiny and perhaps the level of judicial involvement necessary in an employment discrimination class action. But they do not render such a class action either impermissible under Rule 23 or violative of due process or Seventh Amendment jury trial rights. Courts and commentators who insist that …

Due Process Limitations On Punitive Damages: Why State Farm Won't Be The Last Word, Laura J. Hines

Akron Law Review

Part I of this article will trace the development of the evolving principles and requirements the Court is imposing on state awards of punitive damages, identifying notable undercurrents within the Court regarding this new and expanding application of the Due Process Clause. Part II will present a detailed analysis of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Campbell, which represents the Court’s most ambitious attempt yet to provide guidance to states on how to approach the imposition of punitive damages and how to assess the appropriate size thereof. Finally, Part III of this article will examine recent lower court cases …

What Makes The Collateral Source Rule Different?, Michael B. Kelly

Akron Law Review

Tort liability forces parties engaged in risk-producing activities to internalize the costs that the activities impose on those adversely affected by the risks they create. Rational parties should take precautions to reduce those risks rather than pay the costs the risks cause – at least up to the point that further reductions would cost more than the harms they would prevent. How could reforms that reduce liability, and thus force parties to internalize a lower portion of the costs suffered as a result of the risks they create, produce a decrease in fatal accidents? Part I below briefly considers this …

A Cap On The Defendant's Appeal Bond?: Punitive Damages Tort Reform, Doug Rendleman

Akron Law Review

This article begins in Part II with background about appeal bonds and the way their amounts were set before tort reform. Since the defendant’s cost of an appeal bond is an expense and, perhaps, an impediment to its appeal, the defendant will seek ways to surmount, reduce, or avoid the impediment. Part II then uses Pennzoil v. Texaco to illustrate two of defendants’ strategies for staying collection on a judgment pending review in lieu of posting a huge appeal bond—obtain a federal injunction and file for bankruptcy. This article shows why neither strategy is sufficient: the federal court’s abstention doctrines …

Statutory Caps And Judicial Review Of Damages, Colleen P. Murphy

Akron Law Review

In this article, I examine two procedural questions arising from the use of statutory caps. First, how should a statutory cap affect judicial review of awards for possible excessiveness? Second, when a legislature has imposed a total cap on a combination of different types of damages (such as on the total of punitive and compensatory damages or on the total of economic and noneconomic damages), how should courts allocate multiple awards to conform to the cap?...With respect to multiple awards that exceed a total cap on different types of damages, I suggest that the appropriate way to conform multiple awards …

The Struggle Over Tort Reform And The Overlooked Legacy Of The Progressives, Rachel M. Janutis

Akron Law Review

In attempting to distinguish the 1950s and 1960s tort expansion from the current tort retraction, the scholarly account depicts the tort expansion as primarily a judicial movement led by legal academics devoid of any self-interest. In contrast, this account holds out the current tort retraction as a mainly political movement driven by the economic self-interest of its proponents...First, contemporary tort reform, rather than solely being a reaction to tort expansion in the 1950s and 1960s, is part of a continuing debate between corporate, professional and insurance interests on one side and consumer interests and the trial bar on the other …

Exxon Shipping Co. V. Baker: Why The Supreme Court Missed The Boat On Punitive Damages, Maria C. Klutinoty

Akron Law Review

This Note will touch upon the numerous constitutional challenges the doctrine of punitive damages has faced, and will discuss noteworthy Supreme Court cases preceding Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker at length, including BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, 5 as well as State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Campbell. 6 This Note argues against the imposition of a strict one-to-one maximum ratio of punitiveto-compensatory damages. In light of the varying application of Exxon outside of the maritime context, such an imposition defeats the purpose of punitive damages by diluting their potential for deterrence, and it needlessly complicates the …

Statutory Caps On Punitive Damages: Are They Infringing On Your Rights?, Lynsey Russell

Missouri Law Review

The argument surrounding statutory caps on punitive damages seems to be black and white – either for or against. However, this may not be the case, as a closer evaluation of Missouri history and the instant decision suggest that the issue is more nuanced. First, Part II of this Note summarizes the facts, procedural posture, and holding of Lewellen v. Franklin. Second, Part III explores the legal background of punitive damages and the limitations that have historically been imposed on them. Next, Part IV describes the majority opinion in Lewellen and examines the Supreme Court of Missouri’s rationale. Lastly, Part …

Pricing Lives For Corporate Risk Decisions, W. Kip Viscusi

Vanderbilt Law Review

The 2014 GM ignition-switch recall highlighted the inadequacies of the company's safety culture and the shortcomings of regulatory sanctions. The company's inattention to systematic thinking about product safety can be traced to the hostile treatment of corporate risk analyses by the courts. This Article proposes that companies should place a greater value on lives at risk than they have in previous risk analyses and that they should receive legal protections for product risk analyses. Companies' valuations of fatality risks and regulatory penalties have priced lives too low. The guidance provided by the value of a statistical life, which is currently …

International Mass Tort Litigation: Forum Non Conveniens And The Adequate Alternative Forum In Light Of The Bhopal Disaster, Stephen L. Cummings

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.