Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Missouri Law Review

2013

Punitive damages

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Raised Eyebrow Test Produces Further Head-Scratching: Punitive Damages In Ondrisek V. Hoffman, The, Valerie Shands Jun 2013

Raised Eyebrow Test Produces Further Head-Scratching: Punitive Damages In Ondrisek V. Hoffman, The, Valerie Shands

Missouri Law Review

Ondrisek reveals that although the Eighth Circuit uses the same test as the Supreme Court, it certainly applies it differently. When comparing Ondrisek and other Eighth Circuit cases, one sees a subtle pattern that diverges from the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence. However, these differences are not yet distinct enough for the Supreme Court to have granted certiorari to resolve the inconsistencies.


Two Wrongs Do Not Make A Right: Reconsidering The Application Of Comparative Fault To Punitive Damage Awards , Victor E. Schwartz, Christopher E. Appel Jan 2013

Two Wrongs Do Not Make A Right: Reconsidering The Application Of Comparative Fault To Punitive Damage Awards , Victor E. Schwartz, Christopher E. Appel

Missouri Law Review

The purpose of this Article is to reexamine and appropriately analyze the application of comparative fault to punitive damages. The Article challenges the conventional wisdom that these spheres of law should remain separate. Part II begins with an overview of the development of the law of comparative fault with punitive damages. It discusses the limited attention that has been paid to potential overlap in these areas of law and draws parallels with other developments in the law of comparative fault supporting more accurate and just awards of damages. Part III analyzes the public policy arguments for and against applying comparative …