Torts Commons^™

The Foggy Road For Evaluating Punitive Damages: Lifting The Haze From The Bmw/State Farm Guideposts, Steven L. Chanenson, John Y. Gotanda

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In this Article, Professors Chanenson and Gotanda propose that courts treat comparable maximum criminal or civil legislative fines as a presumptive due process limit on punitive damage awards. The Article reviews the manner in which courts have implemented the three-guidepost framework for constitutional review of punitive awards laid out by the Supreme Court in BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore and in State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Campbell. Finding that courts have struggled to articulate a coherent rationale and methodology for review of such awards, the authors propose a greater reliance on the third guidepost of …

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 …

Corrective Justice In Contract Law: Is There A Case For Punitive Damages?, Curtis Bridgeman

Vanderbilt Law Review

Twentieth-century American legal theory has been dominated by utilitarian and economic approaches. As a result, scholarly analyses of contract and tort law have focused on the public effects of the resolution of private disputes. But in the last twenty years or so justice has undergone a renaissance as so-called corrective-justice theorists have tried to shift the discussion in private law back to the relationships between individual parties. Tort law has been a particularly fertile ground for corrective-justice theorists, and a lively debate has developed about what the best corrective-justice account of tort law would look like.

By contrast, comparatively little …

Symposium, Justice And Democracy Forum: The Law And Politics Of Tort Reform, Ann C. Mcginley

Scholarly Works

On April 25, 2003, the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (“UNLV”) Center for Democratic Culture (“CDC”) and the William S. Boyd School of Law sponsored a one-day symposium addressing issues of tort reform. In particular, the Forum addressed concerns regarding construction defect litigation and medical malpractice, two areas of current and substantial concern in Nevada. As reflected in the discussion at the Forum, both topics received considerable attention from the Nevada State Legislature during its 2003 Session. Ultimately, the legislature enacted amendments to state statutes governing claims for defective construction. Despite significant lobbying by physicians and insurers, the legislature did …

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.

The Impact Of State Prohibitions Of Punitive Damages On Libel Litigation: An Empirical Analysis, Dennis Hale

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

This Article explores the role of punitive damages in media libel cases by measuring the quantity and quality of libel appeals for a ten-year period in states with and without punitive damages. Specifically, the Article identifies appellate court decisions for media libel cases over a ten year period from 1986 to 1995, comparing five states with punitive damages (Alabama, New Mexico, South Carolina, South Dakota and Tennessee) to five states without punitive damages (Louisiana, Massachusetts, Nebraska, Oregon and Washington). Each appeal of a federal or state media libel case was coded for the following characteristics: year, whether the media won …

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' …

"Crimtorts" As Corporate Just Deserts, Thomas Koenig, Michael Rustad

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Just as Grant Gilmore described "contorts" that lie on the borderline between contract and tort law, the authors coin the term "crimtort" to identify the expanding common ground between criminal and tort law. Although the concept of crimtort can be broadly applied to many areas of the law, this Article focuses on the primary crimtort remedy - punitive damages. The deterrent power of punitive damages lies in the wealth-calibration of the defendant's punishment. For corporations this means that punitive damages will reflect the firm's net income or net worth. The theoretical danger is that juries will abuse wealth by redistributing …

Measuring The Deterrent Effect Of Punitive Damages, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Professor Viscusi's article differs from the dominant mode of law and economics scholarship on punitive damages. The usual punitive damages article contains purely theoretical considerations about when punitive damages are appropriate and about their optimal level; no effort is made to ascertain whether the existing pattern of punitive awards corresponds with the theory. This is part of a larger problem: the dearth of empirical evidence in law and economics scholarship. Viscusi, on the other hand, provides empirical tests of whether punitive damages accomplish their goals, and he makes creative use of publicly available data sources. For the goal of his …

Tort Reform 1997-98: Profits V. People, Kenneth D. Kranz

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Recalibrating The Scales Of Justice Through National Punitive Damage Reform, Kimberly A. Pace

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mass Tort Litigation: Congress's Silent, But Deadly, Reform Effort, Mary J. Davis

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This article explores the ways in which The Common Sense Product Liability and Legal

Reform Act (“Act”) treats mass tort litigation issues. The Act does so both directly and indirectly. The direct methods of reform are mostly industry-specific and, thus, almost inconsequential in contrast to the indirect treatment. The indirect, almost clandestine, methods of reform are the most insidious and provide the most cause for concern as Congress once again attempts to "reform" products liability by reintroducing the Act in 1997. Given the President's early indication that a reform measure could meet with his approval, but that this one in …

Limits On Preemption And Punitive Damages: Can They Be Related?, Peter Zablotsky

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Tis Better To Give Than To Receive: Charitable Donations Of Medical Malpractice Punitive Damages, Nicholas M. Miller

Journal of Law and Health

The purpose of this Note is not to answer the question of how excessive medical malpractice and punitive damage awards are. Many highly respected scholars on different sides of the issue have spent large portions of their careers trying to resolve that issue without finding a common ground. This author does not boldly claim to provide an answer in this limited forum. This Note does, however, address a possible source of public frustration with the state of medical malpractice and punitive damages: the lack of a principled basis for the awards that juries give to the victims. The perception among …

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.

"Other Accident" Evidence In Product Liability Actions: Highly Probative Or An Accident Waiting To Happen?, Robert A. Sachs

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

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.

The Constitutionality Of State Allocation Of Punitive Damage Awards, Paul F. Kirgis

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Punitive Damages And Regulated Products, Teresa Moran Schwartz

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Poetic Justice: Punitive Damages And Legal Pluralism, Marc Galanter, David Luban

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Historical Continuity Of Punitive Damages Awards: Reforming The Tort Reformers, Michael Rustad, Thomas Koenig

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Punitive Damages And Regulated Products, Teresa Moran Schwartz

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Poetic Justice: Punitive Damages And Legal Pluralism, Marc Galanter, David Luban

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Historical Continuity Of Punitive Damages Awards: Reforming The Tort Reformers, Michael Rustad, Thomas Koenig

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Compensatory And Punitive Damages For A Personal Injury: To Tax Or Not To Tax, Douglas A. Kahn

Articles

Since the adoption in 1919 of the Revenue Act of 1918, damages received on account of personal injuries or sickness have been excluded by statute from gross income.1 This exclusion, which does not apply to reimbursements for medical expenses for which the taxpayer was previously allowed a tax deduction,2 is presently set forth in section 104(a)(2). One might expect that a provision having recently attained the ripe age of 75 years without change in its basic language would have a settled meaning. However, recent litigation under section 104(a)(2) bristles with unsettled issues. Does the exclusion apply to punitive damages? To …

Exclusion Of Personal Injury Damages: Have The Courts Gone Too Far?, Susan K. Matlow

Vanderbilt Law Review

The Internal Revenue Code (Code) sweeps into gross income "all income from whatever source derived," including, but not limited to, compensation for services, interest, dividends, rents, and alimony payments.' Specific statutory exclusions may exempt from gross income certain items that Congress has determined deserve favorable tax treatment. One such exclusion, section 104(a)(2), provides that gross income shall not include "the amount of any damages received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump-sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal injuries or sickness."' Congress enacted section 104(a)(2)'s predecessor in 1918," and in spite of subsequent revolutionary tax reform, …