Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Nullificatory Juries, Kaimipono David Wenger, David A. Hoffman
Nullificatory Juries, Kaimipono David Wenger, David A. Hoffman
All Faculty Scholarship
In this Article, we argue that current debates on the legitimacy of punitive damages would benefit from a comparison with jury nullification in criminal trials. We discuss critiques of punitive damages and of jury nullification, noting the surprising similarities in the arguments scholars use to attack these (superficially) distinct outcomes of the jury guarantee. Not only are the criticisms alike, the institutions of punitive damages and jury nullification also turn out to have many similarities: both are, we suggest, examples of what we call "nullificatory juries." We discuss the features of such juries, and consider recent behavioral data relating to …
"Death Is Different" - Is Money Different? Criminal Punishments, Forfeitures, And Punitive Damages - Shifting Constitutional Paradigms For Assessing Proportionality, Rachel A. Van Cleave
"Death Is Different" - Is Money Different? Criminal Punishments, Forfeitures, And Punitive Damages - Shifting Constitutional Paradigms For Assessing Proportionality, Rachel A. Van Cleave
Publications
Part I of this Article reviews the case law regarding judicial review of both terms of imprisonment and imposition of the death penalty. In this section, I argue for consistency within this area of the law. Some jurisprudence suggests that, because "death is different," proportionality review is appropriate only in the death penalty context, and is either not required or only applies in an extremely narrow example, such as life imprisonment for a parking ticket. Part II examines Supreme Court precedent that analyzes the question of proportionality of forfeitures and punitive damages awards. In the context of forfeitures, the debate …
The Insurability Of Punitive Damages In Washington: Should Insureds Who Engage In Intentional Misconduct Reap The Benefit Of Their "Bargains?", Stephanie L. Grassia
The Insurability Of Punitive Damages In Washington: Should Insureds Who Engage In Intentional Misconduct Reap The Benefit Of Their "Bargains?", Stephanie L. Grassia
Seattle University Law Review
This Note examines the issue of the insurability of punitive damages, concluding that insurance coverage should not be allowed for punitive damages arising from intentional misconduct because such coverage contravenes public policy in the state of Washington. Part I defines and provides background for punitive damages and malicious prosecution. Part II outlines and synthesizes the treatment of the insurability of punitive damages in various states. The facts of the Fluke case, including the Court of Appeals's rationale that insurance coverage for punitive damages is not against public policy in Washington, are detailed in Part III. The next section reveals the …
A Taxing Settlement, Hanoch Dagan, James J. White
A Taxing Settlement, Hanoch Dagan, James J. White
Articles
The following essay is based on the talk "Government, Citizens, and Injurious Industries: A Case Study of the Tobacco Litigation," delivered by Hanoch Dagan last May to the Detroit Chapter of the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists, and on the article "Governments, Citizens, and Injurious Industries," by Dagan and James J. White, '62, which appeared in 75.2 New York University Law Review 254-428 (May 2000). The authors hold conflicting view on the underlying issue of this topic: tobacco company product liability. Professor Dagan holds the position that tobacco companies are liable for harm done by their products; Professor …