Torts Commons^™

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 …

Punitive Damages And The Drunken Driver, William C. Cooper

Pepperdine Law Review

A discussion of the history and theory of punitive damages which results in advocating their application in a drunk driving context after giving due consideration to the pros and cons of such a sanction. An analysis of case law will reveal the underlying rationale that has motivated certain jurisdictions in applying this severe penal approach in an attempt to deter and curtail the senseless destruction on our nation's highways as well as exploring the impetus behind those other jurisdictions that do not utilize the remedy of punitive damages. The culminating focus is on California's position in this regard. Finally, there …

The Manville Corporation Bankruptcy: An Abuse Of The Judicial Process?, Mark Kunkler

Pepperdine Law Review

Federal bankruptcy law offers a refuge to the honest debtor who is unable to pay his creditor's when his debts are due. Here, the twin aims of bankruptcy law, to give the debtor a fresh start and to provide roughly equal treatment for his! Creditors, are laudably accomplished. But what policies support the use of federal bankruptcy law when the "debtor" is in fact solvent and apparently seeks refuge only to escape liability for the products it manufactures? This comment examines the recent filing of the Manville Corporation for Chapter 11 protection under bankruptcy law with this question in mind.

The Risky Interplay Of Tort And Criminal Law: Punitive Damages, Daniel M. Braun

Daniel M Braun

The rise of modern mass tort litigation in the U.S. has transformed punitive damages into something of a “hot button” issue. Since the size of punitive damage awards grew so dramatically in the past half century, this private law remedy has begun to involve issues of constitutional rights that traditionally pertained to criminal proceedings. This has created a risky interplay between tort and criminal law, and courts have thus been trying to find ways to properly manage punitive damage awards. The once rapidly expanding universe of punitive damages is therefore beginning to contract. There remain, however, very serious difficulties. Despite …

Taxing Punitive Damages, Gregg D. Polsky, Dan Markel

Scholarly Works

There is a curious anomaly in the law of punitive damages. Jurors assess punitive damages in the amount that they believe will best “punish” the defendant. But, in fact, defendants are not always punished to the degree that the jury intends. Under the Internal Revenue Code, punitive damages paid by business defendants are tax deductible and, as a result, these defendants often pay (in real dollars) far less than the jury believes they deserve to pay.

To solve this problem of under-punishment, many scholars and policymakers, including President Obama, have proposed making punitive damages nondeductible in all cases. In our …

Consumer Harm Acts? An Economic Analysis Of Private Actions Under State Consumer Protection Acts, Henry N. Butler, Jason S. Johnston

Faculty Working Papers

State Consumer Protection Acts (CPAs) were adopted in the 1960s and 1970s to protect consumers from unfair and deceptive practices that would not be redressed but for the existence of the acts. In this sense, CPAs were designed to fill existing gaps in market, legal and regulatory protections of consumers. CPAs were designed to solve two simple economic problems: 1) individual consumers often do not have the incentive or means to pursue individual claims against mass marketers who engage in unfair and deceptive practices; and, 2) because of the difficulty of establishing elements of either common law fraud or breach …

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. V. Campbell: Refining Bmw Of North America, Inc. V. Gore And Further Restricting Punitive Damages, Bridget E. Leonard

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Impact Of Recent U.S. Supreme Court Punitive Damages Jurisprudence On Oklahoma's Punitive Damages Statute And Jury Instructions, Andrew C. Jayne

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Not So Peaceful Coexistence: Inherent Tensions In Addressing Tort Law Reform, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

As Professor Michael Green's comments trenchantly remind us, all of this has a familiar ring: insurers and tort defendants claim unfairly escalating liability, plaintiffs' lawyers and consumer groups counterattack, and (for the most part), insurers and defendants obtain some of the relief they seek. The tort reform victories are not so overwhelming as to completely unravel the historical rights of victims or the power of courts generally, but some constriction of rights inevitably occurs. During periods of quiescence, plaintiffs and consumers take back some lost territory through common law victories expanding claimant rights, or through specific legislation. Statutes that permitted …

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 …

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 …

Punitive Damages: Cooper Industries V. Leatherman Tool Group: Will A Constitutional Objection To The Excessiveness Of A Punitive Damages Award Save Defendants From Oklahoma's Punitive Damages Statute, Amanda L. Maxfield

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Revisiting The Taxation Of Punitive Damages, Gregg D. Polsky, Dan Markel

Scholarly Works

In our recent article, Taxing Punitive Damages, available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1421879, we argued (1) that plaintiffs in punitive damages cases should be allowed to introduce to the jury evidence regarding the deductibility of those damages by defendants, and (2) that this jury tax-awareness approach is better than the Obama Administration’s suggested alternative of disallowing those deductions.

To our delight, Professor Larry Zelenak and Paul Mogin have each provided published comments to our piece on Virginia Law Review's In Brief companion website. Professor Zelenak’s thoughtful response focuses on our prescriptive claim that jury tax-awareness is better than nondeductibility, while Mr. Mogin disputes …

Governments, Citizens, And Injurious Industries, Hanoch Dagan, James J. White

Articles

In this Article, Professors Hanoch Dagan and James White study the most recent challenge raised by mass torts litigation: the interference of governments with the bilateral relationship between citizens and injurious industries. Using the tobacco settlement as their case study, Dagan and White explore the important benefits and the grave dangers of recognizing governments' entitlement to reimbursement for costs they have incurred in preventing or ameliorating their citizens' injuries. They further demonstrate that the current law can help capture these benefits and guard against the entailing risks, showing how subrogation law can serve as the legal foundation of the governments' …

Attempted Cap On Punitive Damages Continues To Spark Debate, Susan J. Becker

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

The debate surrounding federal product liability law has not been silenced by recent compromises reached by the House and Senate regarding appropriate boundaries for such laws. To the contrary, President Clinton's threatened veto of Congress's Common Sense Product Liability Reform Act of 1996 and continued opposition by the ABA Section of Litigation and other groups to parts of the Act guarantee that the 20-year-old debate will continue to rage.

Evidentiary Use (And Misuse) Of The Civil Defendant's Financial Status, Karen M. Grundy

Articles, Chapters in Books and Other Contributions to Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Punitive Damages: Punishment Of An Insured Defendant?, Carroway V. Johnson, Kenneth Lasson

All Faculty Scholarship

The plaintiff sued the defendant for injuries sustained in an automobile collision and was awarded a judgment in the amount of $5,000 actual damages and $1,500 punitive damages. The defendant's insurance company had refused to defend her in that action or to pay the judgment obtained, relying upon an employee exclusion clause in the policy. The plaintiff thereupon sued the defendant on the judgment, this time joining the insurer as a co-defendant, and won a verdict to recover against the insurer the aforesaid amount. The insurance company appealed, questioning its liability for punitive damages.