Law Commons^™

Breathe Deeply: The Tort Of Smokers' Battery, Irene Scharf

Irene Scharf

This Article explores the long and faltering history of attempts to impose liability on tobacco product manufactures. Part II traces the manufacturers' historical and current actions of targeting youth through both promotions and deceptive advertising. Part III argues in favor of an expanded cause of action against the manufacturers for the intentional tort of battery. Part IV discusses the prospect of awards of punitive damages in these cases, and the Epilogue summarizes other advantages of the battery cause of action.

The Future Of Classwide Punitive Damages, Catherine M. Sharkey

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Conventional wisdom holds that the punitive damages class action is susceptiblenot only to doctrinal restraints imposed on class actions but also to constitutionaldue process limitations placed on punitive damages. Thus, it would seem that theprospects for punitive damages classes are even grimmer than for class actionsgenerally.This conventional picture misunderstands the role of punitive damages and, inparticular, the relationship between class actions and punitive damages. It eitherignores or underestimates the distinctly societal element of punitive damages, whichmakes them especially conducive to aggregate treatment. Furthermore, punitivedamages classes offer a solution to the constitutional due process problem of juriesawarding "classwide" damages in a …

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.

Uncle Sam And The Partitioning Punitive Problem: A Federal Split-Recovery Statute Or A Federal Tax?, Skyler M. Sanders

Pepperdine Law Review

It is no secret that the doctrine of punitive damages has had a storied past in American jurisprudence, yet it has remained an integral part of both federal and state courts throughout the country. Most, if not all, attempts to restrict punitive damage awards have failed due to the over-inclusive or under-inclusive nature of the remedial measures; however, split-recovery statutes—another punitive damage regulatory tool—have been touted as striking a proper balance between limiting plaintiff windfalls while still punishing and deterring defendants. Even so, such statutes have been meet with vigorous constitutional criticism and fail to curtail punitive damage awards for …

Remedies: A Guide For The Perplexed, Doug Rendleman

Scholarly Articles

Remedies is one of a law student’s most practical courses. Remedies students and their professors learn to work with their eyes on the question at the end of litigation: what can the court do for the successful plaintiff? Remedies develops students’ professional identities and broadens their professional horizons by reorganizing their analysis of procedure, torts, contracts, and property around choosing and measuring relief - compensatory damages, punitive damages, an injunction, specific performance, disgorgement, and restitution. This article discusses the law-school course in Remedies - the content of the Remedies course, the Remedies classroom experience, and Remedies outside the classroom through …

Constitutional Limitations On Punitive Damages: Ambiguous Effects And Inconsistent Justifications, Benjamin J. Mcmichael

Vanderbilt Law Review

Punitive damages occupy a special place in the U.S. legal system. Courts award them in very few cases, yet they have been the center of tort reform efforts because of their controversial nature.' This controversy centers around the purposes for which punitive damages are awarded-to punish reprehensible conduct and to deter future bad acts. While compensatory damages exist to redress specific harms and to compensate a victim for a particular harm suffered, punitive damages exist to further the much broader social goals of retribution and deterrence.

Because punitive damages must be calibrated to achieve these broad social goals, they necessarily …

Punitive Damages In Product Liability Cases , Mark P. Robinson Jr., Gerald H.B. Kane Jr.

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

Constitutional Restraints On The Doctrine Of Punitive Damages, Theodore B. Olson, Theodore J. Boutrous Jr.

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

Sneering At The Law: An Argument For Punitive Damages In Copyright, R. Collins Kilgore

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

The Copyright Act limits statutory damages in a copyright action to one award for every work that a plaintiff can prove a defendant infringed. The maximum amount a plaintiff may recover for each work is $30,000, except in the case of willful infringement, for which that amount may be increased to a maximum of $150,000. This Note explains how this dual limitation in the Copyright Act--the one-award-per-work limitation and the cap on statutory damage amounts--allows infringers to manipulate court procedures and corporate structure so that their acts of copyright infringement may maintain profitability despite the imposition of maximum statutory damages. …

Justice Holmes’S Bad Man And The Depleted Purposes Of Punitive Damages, Jill W. Lens

Jill Wieber Lens