Friday, February 6, 2015

BMW v. Gore case brief summary

BMW v. Gore case brief summary

Three guideposts in reviewing constitutionality of punitive damages:
  1. the degree of reprehensibility of D’s misconduct
    1. Harm caused was physical as opposed to economic
    2. Conduct showed an indifference or disregard to health/safety of others
    3. Target of the conduct had a financial vulnerability
    4. Conduct involved repeated actions rather than isolated incident
    5. Harm due to intentional malice, trickery or deceit, rather than mere accident
  2. the disparity between the actual or potential harm suffered by P and the punitive damages award--multiplier
  3. the difference between the punitive damages awarded by the jury and the civil penalties authorized or imposed in comparable cases (Also see Souter in Exxon)

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search Thousands of Case Briefs and Articles.