Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Punitive damages (sums intended to punish the defendant) may be awarded in addition to actual damages intended to compensate the plaintiff. Punitive damage awards generally require a higher showing than mere negligence, but lower than intention. For instance, grossly negligent, reckless, or outrageous conduct may be grounds for an award of ...
Punitive damages are entirely unavailable under any circumstances in a few jurisdictions, including Nebraska, Puerto Rico, and Washington. The general rule is that punitive damages cannot be awarded for breach of contract, but if an independent tort is committed in a contractual setting, punitive damages can be awarded for the tort. [25]
Many casual observers considered this excessive. The punitive damages were later significantly reduced by a judge on appeal, though this fact is not as widely known as the jury's initial decision. Martin v. Herzog: statutory violations and duty of care. Palsgraf v.
Bankruptcy Code Section 362(k) authorizes the imposition of punitive damages for a willful violation of the automatic stay. In determining whether to impose punitive damages, several bankruptcy ...
The post Supreme Court Can Protect Property Owners From Eminent Domain Abuse appeared first on Reason.com. Show comments. Advertisement. Advertisement. In Other News. Entertainment. Entertainment.
Conversely, the status of a visitor as a trespasser grants certain rights to the visitor if they are injured due to the negligence of the property owner. Licensee – A person who is on the property of another, despite the fact that the property is not open to the general public; historically, emergency workers have been considered licensees.
Punitive damages The maliciousness and willingness of the defendant to carry out certain wrongful acts are typically what compel the court to impose punitive damages. Since the intention of punitive damages is typically not to compensate the plaintiff, it is often that only a part of it would be awarded to the plaintiff at the discretion of ...
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408 (2003), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that the due process clause usually limits punitive damage awards to less than ten times the size of the compensatory damages awarded and that punitive damage awards of four times the compensatory damage award is "close to the line of constitutional impropriety".