Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Product Liability Law & StrategyLJN NewslettersNewsSections

Practice Tip: Pleading Punitive Damages After Supreme Court's State Farm Decision

By Lawrence Goldhirsch
August 29, 2003

Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that any award of punitive damages designed to punish out-of-state conduct would not be permitted because it violated the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Campbell, __US__, 2003 WL 1791206 (decided April 7, 2003). This decision will effect broad changes in current product liability law with respect to punitive damages; however, the most important immediate change to practitioners will be in pleading.

In product liability cases, the allegation that the plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages must usually be contained in another cause of action, eg, negligence, fraud, or breach of warranty. Punitive damages are recoverable for tortious conduct that involves malice, oppression, or acts that are wanton or reckless. Often, plaintiffs will try to establish evil intent by showing that there was a 'public wrong,' ie, the defendant undertook a wide-scale course of conduct that affected not only the plaintiff in the lawsuit but others as well. Where those 'others' are persons outside the plaintiff's state, State Farm probably requires proof that such conduct was tortious.

This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

Compliance Officers: Recent Regulatory Guidance and Enforcement Actions and Mitigating the Risk of Personal Liability Image

This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.