BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore case brief summary
517 U.S. 559 (1996)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Petitioner automobile distributor appealed a decision of the Supreme Court of Alabama, which affirmed a finding in favor of respondent auto owner on petitioner's post-trial motion to set aside a punitive damages award in an action alleging suppression of a material fact.
CASE FACTS
Respondent discovered that his new car had been repainted. He brought suit against petitioner distributor alleging that its failure to disclose the repair constituted suppression of a material fact. Evidence was introduced at trial that petitioner had a policy of nondisclosure where pre-delivery repairs amounted to less than 3 percent of the retail price of the car. The jury awarded actual damages of $ 4,000 and punitive damages of $ 4,000,000. Petitioner's motion to set aside the punitive damages award was denied by both the trial court and the appellate court. However, the appellate court reduced the award to $ 2,000,000 because it was inaccurately calculated.
DISCUSSION
The denial of a motion to set aside the punitive damages award was reversed where the Court held that petitioner distributor's conduct was not particularly reprehensible because it only caused minor economic harm and a 500 to 1 ratio of punitive damages to compensatory damages was not reasonable.
Suggested Study Aids and Books
517 U.S. 559 (1996)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Petitioner automobile distributor appealed a decision of the Supreme Court of Alabama, which affirmed a finding in favor of respondent auto owner on petitioner's post-trial motion to set aside a punitive damages award in an action alleging suppression of a material fact.
CASE FACTS
Respondent discovered that his new car had been repainted. He brought suit against petitioner distributor alleging that its failure to disclose the repair constituted suppression of a material fact. Evidence was introduced at trial that petitioner had a policy of nondisclosure where pre-delivery repairs amounted to less than 3 percent of the retail price of the car. The jury awarded actual damages of $ 4,000 and punitive damages of $ 4,000,000. Petitioner's motion to set aside the punitive damages award was denied by both the trial court and the appellate court. However, the appellate court reduced the award to $ 2,000,000 because it was inaccurately calculated.
DISCUSSION
- The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
- It reversed and remanded the case.
- It held that petitioner's conduct was not particularly reprehensible because it only caused minor economic harm and the 500 to 1 ratio of punitive damages to compensatory damages was not reasonable.
The denial of a motion to set aside the punitive damages award was reversed where the Court held that petitioner distributor's conduct was not particularly reprehensible because it only caused minor economic harm and a 500 to 1 ratio of punitive damages to compensatory damages was not reasonable.
Suggested Study Aids and Books
No comments:
Post a Comment