Torts Commons^™

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

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Punitive Damages, J. Donald Bowen, Kim Brown, Oliver S. Howard

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

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

UF Law Faculty Publications

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 …

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.

Debunking The Myth That Insurance Coverage Is Not Available Or Allowed For Intentional Torts Or Damages, Christopher French

Faculty Scholarship

Over the years, a myth has developed that insurance coverage is not available or allowed for intentional injuries or damage. This myth has two primary bases: one, the “fortuity” doctrine, which provides that insurance should only cover losses that happen by chance; and two, public policy, which allegedly disfavors allowing insurance for intentional injuries or damage. This article dispels that myth. Many types of liability insurance policies expressly cover intentional torts including trademark infringement, copyright infringement, invasion of privacy, defamation, disparagement, and improper employment practices such as discrimination. In addition, punitive damages, which typically are awarded for intentional misconduct, are …

New Private Law Theory And Tort Law: A Comment, Keith N. Hylton

Faculty Scholarship

This comment was prepared for the Harvard Law Review symposium on “The New Private Law,” as a response to Benjamin Zipursky’s principal paper on torts. I find Zipursky’s reliance on Cardozo’s Palsgraf opinion as a foundational source of tort theory troubling, for two reasons. First, Cardozo fails to offer a consistent theoretical framework for tort law in his opinions, many of which are difficult to reconcile with one another. Second, Palsgraf should be understood as an effort by Cardozo to provide greater predictability, within a special class of proximate cause cases, by reallocating decision-making power from juries to judges. It …

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

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Economic Loss, Punitive Damages, And The Exxon Valdez Litigation, Dr. Ronen Perry

Georgia Law Review

On March 24, 1989, the Exxon Valdez ran aground on
Bligh Reef off the Alaskan coast, spilling millions of
gallons of crude oil into Prince William Sound. At the

time, the spill was probably the worst environmental
disaster in American history, and it sparked unusually
extensive and complex litigation, as well as a vast
academic literature. The Article uncovers a fundamental
yet unnoticed inconsistency in American land-based and
maritime tort law that surfaced through the Exxon Valdez
litigation. On the one hand, liability for purely economic
losses was strictly limited under Robins Dry Dock v. Flint,
leaving dozens of thousands …

Capping Incentives, Capping Innovation, Courting Disaster: The Gulf Oil Spill And Arbitrary Limits On Civil Liability, Andrew F. Popper

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Limiting liability by establishing an arbitrary cap on civil damages is bad public policy. Caps are antithetical to the interests of consumers and at odds with the national interest in creating incentives for better and safer products. Whether the caps are on non-economic loss, punitive damages, or set for specific activity, they undermine the civil justice system, deceiving juries and denying just and reasonable compensation for victims in a broad range of fields.

This Article postulates that capped liability on damages for offshore oil spills may well have been an instrumental factor contributing to the recent Deepwater Horizon catastrophe in …

Epstein's Razor, David G. Owen

Faculty Publications

Richard Epstein, over a long and distinguished career, has offered inspired insights into how a legal system should be framed to serve the goals of those it governs. In that pursuit, he has relentlessly applied a sharp logic - call it Epstein's Razor - to shave away the detritus of complexity and confusion that surround perplexing problems, leaving standing only truths unscathed by competition among ideas. Over decades of diverse writings on law and political theory, highlighted by his elegant Simple Rules for a Complex World, Professor Epstein offers a vision of law constructed on the view that simplicity in …

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 …

Penalizing Punitive Damages: Why The Supreme Court Needs A Lesson In Law And Economics, Steve P. Calandrillo

Articles

The recent landmark Supreme Court decision addressing punitive damages in the infamous Exxon Valdez oil spill case has brought the issue of punitive awards back into the legal limelight. Modern Supreme Court jurisprudence, most notably BMW of North America, Inc. [517 U.S. 559 (1996)], State Farm [538 U.S. 408 (2003)], Philip Morris [549 U.S. 346 (2007)], and now Exxon Shipping Co. [128 S.Ct. 2605 (2008)] in 2008, has concluded that such judgments are justified to punish morally reprehensible behavior and to send a message to evildoers. The Court, however, has increasingly emphasized that the U.S. Constitution's Due Process Clause presumptively …

Punitive Damages By Numbers: Exxon Shipping Co. V. Baker, Joni Hersch, W. Kip Viscusi

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker is a landmark that establishes an upper bound ratio of punitive damages to compensatory damages of 1:1 for maritime cases, with potential implications for other types of cases as well. This article critiques the Court’s reliance on the median ratio of punitive to compensatory damages in samples of verdicts to set an upper bound for punitive damages awards. Our critique of the approach draws on the properties of statistical distributions and a new analysis of cases with punitive damages awards. The Court’s conclusion that a 1:1 ratio establishes a …

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 …

Reflections On Remedies And Philip Morris V. Williams, Keith N. Hylton

Faculty Scholarship

This essay is a series of reflections on the implications of Philip Morris for the tort reform movement, a movement for which I share considerable sympathy. First, I offer an ideal approach to punitive damages-based on my amicus brief in Philip Morris-and apply that approach to the case. I make an effort to find a middle ground between the positions of the plaintiff and defendant because, in any case that reaches the Supreme Court, one will find persuasive arguments to be made on both sides. That middle ground involves largely returning to the Supreme Court's pre-Gore treatment of punitive …

An Erie Obstacle To State Tort Reform, Richard Henry Seamon

Articles

No abstract provided.

Punitive Damages After Campbell: The Role Of Out-Of-State Conduct, Steven R. Hamlin

Campbell Law Review

This article examines the scope of out-of-state conduct that may be used after Campbell.

U.S. Supreme Court Tort Reform: Limiting State Power To Articulate And Develop Its Own Tort Law–Defamation, Preemption, And Punitive Damages, Thomas C. Galligan

ExpressO

U.S. Supreme Court Tort Reform: Limiting State Power to Articulate and Develop Its Own Tort Law–Defamation, Preemption, and Punitive Damages analyzes and critiques the three primary areas in which the U.S. Supreme Court has found federal constitutional limits on a state’s power to articulate, develop, and apply its common law of torts. It is the first piece to consider all three areas together as an emerging body of jurisprudence which Professor Galligan calls U.S. Supreme Court tort reform. After setting forth a modest model of adjudication, the article applies that model to each of the three areas: defamation and related …

Civil And Criminal Recidivists: Extraterritoriality In Tort And Crime, Wayne A. Logan

Scholarly Publications

Historically, punitive damage awards and criminal sentences have shared the common justifications of punishment and deterrence, with the culpability of tortfeasors and criminals alike being enhanced as a result of repeat misconduct. The Supreme Court’s 2003 decision in State Farm v. Campbell suggests, however, that the parallels now in effect stop at the state line. The extraterritorial misconduct of tortfeasors is permitted to play a very limited role, if any, in the assessment of punitive damage awards. Meanwhile, such misconduct continues to be used by courts to significantly enhance the sentences of criminal defendants, an asymmetry accentuated by California v. …

The Road From Nowhere? Punitive Damage Ratios After Bmw V. Gore And State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. V. Campbell, Andrew C. W. Lund

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This article offers a brief introduction to BMW and its immediate aftermath. After the decision was handed down in 1996, scholars found that punitive damage award ratios were still arbitrary. In Part III, one hypothesis given to explain this result--that not enough time had elapsed since BMW to allow lower courts to come to grips with its lessons--is examined and dismissed after observing how post-BMW courts continued to give shape to the guideposts well beyond 1996. Part IV offers a different hypothesis, which better explains why punitive damage awards behaved arbitrarily. The cause of ratios' weakness lay in the BMW …

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 …

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.

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 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 …

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 …

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 …

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 …

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 …

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.