Legal Remedies Commons^™

Precise Punishment: Why Precise Punitive Damage Requests Result In Higher Awards Than Round Requests, Michael Conklin

Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review

Imagine a setting where someone asks two people what the temperature is outside. The first person says it is 80 °F, while the second person says it is 78.7 °F. Research regarding precise versus round cognitive anchoring suggests that the second person is more likely to be believed. This is because it is human nature to assume that if someone gives a precise answer, he must have good reason for doing so. This principle remains constant in a variety of settings, including used car negotiations, eBay transactions, and estimating the field goal percentage of a basketball player.

This Article reports …

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.

Punishment But Not A Penalty? Punitive Damages Are Impermissible Under Foreign Substantive Law, Paul A. Hoversten

Michigan Law Review

It is a well-established principle that no court applies the penal laws of another sovereign. But what exactly is a penal law? According to Judge Cardozo, a penal law effects “vindication of the public justice” rather than “reparation to one aggrieved.” Although courts have historically treated punitive damages as a purely civil remedy, that attitude has shifted over time. Modern American punitive damages serve not to compensate the plaintiff but to punish the defendant on behalf of the whole community. Therefore, when courts rely on foreign substantive law to impose punitive damages, they arguably violate the well-established principle that no …

Pricing Lives For Corporate Risk Decisions, W. Kip Viscusi

Vanderbilt Law Review

The 2014 GM ignition-switch recall highlighted the inadequacies of the company's safety culture and the shortcomings of regulatory sanctions. The company's inattention to systematic thinking about product safety can be traced to the hostile treatment of corporate risk analyses by the courts. This Article proposes that companies should place a greater value on lives at risk than they have in previous risk analyses and that they should receive legal protections for product risk analyses. Companies' valuations of fatality risks and regulatory penalties have priced lives too low. The guidance provided by the value of a statistical life, which is currently …

International Mass Tort Litigation: Forum Non Conveniens And The Adequate Alternative Forum In Light Of The Bhopal Disaster, Stephen L. Cummings

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Invading The Realm Of The Dead: Exploring The (Im)Propriety Of Punitive Damage Awards Against Estates, Emily Himes Iversen

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Punitive damages are traditionally understood, at least in part, as damages designed to punish. It should therefore come as no surprise that, in the majority of states that have decided the issue, courts have chosen not to allow punitive damage awards against the estates of deceased tortfeasors. After all, the tortfeasor can no longer be punished (at least by tort awards). Nonetheless, punitive damages can also serve other purposes, such as deterrence. This Note argues that Michigan, a state which has not yet taken a stance, should adopt the minority position that allows punitive damages to be awarded against estates. …

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 …

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 …

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.

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

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Financial Economic Theory Of Punitive Damages, Robert J. Rhee

Michigan Law Review

This Article provides a financial economic theory of punitive damages. The core problem, as the Supreme Court acknowledged in Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker, is not the systemic amount of punitive damages in the tort system; rather it is the risk of outlier outcomes. Low frequency, high severity awards are unpredictable, cause financial distress, and beget social cost. By focusing only on offsetting escaped liability, the standard law and economics theory fails to account for the core problem of variance. This Article provides a risk arbitrage analysis of the relationship between variance, litigation valuation, and optimal deterrence. Starting with settlement …

State Limits: Can One State Rule The Country? One State Awarding Punitive Damages For Nationwide Conduct, Heather Burgess

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Confirmation Of Punitive Awards In Arbitration: Did Due Process Disappear?, Stuart M. Boyarsky

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Part I of this article provides a brief overview of the reasoning behind the limited judicial review of an arbitral award. Part II describes the state action doctrine and explains how several courts have used the doctrine in order to apply due process protection to proceedings involving private actors. In particular, this section discusses several significant decisions that involve the issue of whether a court's confirmation of an arbitrator's award of punitive damages creates state action and requires the application of constitutional protections such as due process. This Note concludes that due to a leading decision by the Eleventh Circuit, …

Measurement Of Restitution: Coordinating Restitution With Compensatory Damages And Punitive Damages, Doug Rendleman

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ascertaining The Burden Of Proof For An Award For Punitive Damages In New York? Consult Your Local Appellate Division, Leon D. Lazer, John R. Higgitt

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

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.

No Harm, No Foul?: An Argument For The Allowance Of Punitive Damages Without Compensatory Damages Under 42 U.S.C. § 1981a, Christy Lynn Mcquality

Washington and Lee 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 …

The Role Of "Stories" In Civil Jury Judgments, Reid Hastie

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

A brief review of psychological theories of juror decision making is followed by an introduction to "explanation-based" theories of judgment. Prior empirical studies of explanation-based processes in juror decision making are then reviewed. An original empirical study of jurors' judgments concerning liability for punitive damages is presented to illustrate the explanation-based approach to civil decisions.

"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 …

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 Reform-State Legislatures Can And Should Meet The Challenge Issued By The Supreme Court Of The United States In Haslip, Victor F. Schwartz, Mark A. Behrens

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.