Punitive damage is defined as monetary damages in excess of a compensatory award, usually granted only in intentional tort cases where defendant’s conduct involved some element deserving punishment. Punitive damages are also called exemplary damages since they are intended to punish the wrongdoer (Reed et al 796).
There is an ongoing debate over whether or not awarding punitive damages need to be limited and a national concern that this award in a lawsuit may very well violate due process clause under the Fourteenth Amendment. In a 2003 case of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Campbell, where the defendant Campbell and his wife was involved in a car accident that left one party dead and a third permanently disabled. Defendant and State Farm, defendant’s insurance agency, decided to contest
…show more content…
Cons of awarding punitive damages include money to be paid or punishment not severe enough. Most companies can afford to raise prices for goods and services to compensate for settlements and therefore the intent of punitive damages can be ineffective. On the other hand, a company or an individual may become bankrupt after such judgment is made against their favor. State may also impose regulations arising from the lawsuit that could cause bankruptcy to many companies within an industry. Another con is that awarding punitive damages allows for companies and individuals to get away with negligence and sets a precedent for others to do the same. For example, the defendant mentioned in the case above. This man clearly committed a crime and in my opinion should not have been awarded anything for compensation worse punitive
Damages in the United States include two categories. Compensatory damages are intended to compensate for the plaintiff’s loss. Punitive damages, on the contrary, are meant to punish the defendant .The punitive damages exceed the plaintiff’s loss, to dissuade the defendant from any further wrongdoings. For instance, having a company pay significant punitive damages may encourage it to greater caution. Another difference between the two categories is the money involved. If the damages are compensatory, the money usually goes entirely to the plaintiff, but if they are punitive, part of the money goes to the law firm and part to the plaintiff.
A series of events unfolded when George, running late for class, parked his car on a steep section on Arbutus drive and failed to remember to set the parking brake. The outcome of not remembering to set the parking brake caused many issues resulting in scrapping a Prius, breaking through fencing, people on the train sustaining injuries, and finally a truck that jack-knifed and caused a 42-car pileup. Could the parties that were injured, from George’s actions, be recovered from under the negligence theory? To understand if George is negligent, it is best to look at the legal issue, the required elements of negligence, the definition and explanation of each element of the case, and finally to draw a conclusion to determine if George is negligent.
The refinement of this definition has significant legal implications, as it broadens the scope of those who can sue within blameless accidents. Prior to this, such victims would also face being labelled with “fault”. Supporting the findings of Axiak, by establishing non-tortious conduct as separate from “fault”, similar, future cases are more likely to proceed despite the plaintiff’s contributory
The second issue is whether or not the defendant has an obligation to reimburse for an injury. The outcome of this second issue depends whether or not it is rational for the defendant to have to pa...
The first thing that one needs to consider is the situation that victims are normally under. No one chooses to be in an accident, it is something that is unexpected. Because of that those who are affected are often not at a point financially where they can handle the results of the accident such as lost time at work, medical bills, and other associated cost. Worsening the situation is the fact that the injuring party in the accident often does not want to compensate the victims for their actions. This results in an even
A wrongful conviction is the worst thing that a jury, witness, investigator or judge could be responsible for. The burden and the guilt that will be placed on the shoulders of them, knowing an innocent person had to spend time out of their personal life in prison is unbearable. Nobody is perfect, but everybody should try to be as close as possible to perfect when they are putting a person in prison for a crime they are sure they committed. Compensation will help the innocent victim who had to waste time in prison but nothing will replace the time missed away from families and many families turn on and hate the person thrown in jail because they thought they were indeed guilty, little to their knowledge their innocent. Money can sometimes buy happiness, but it cannot replace lost love and wasted time in prison.
“Restorative justice is an approach to crime and other wrongdoings that focuses on repairing harm and encouraging responsibility and involvement of the parties impacted by the wrong.” This quote comes from a leading restorative justice scholar named Howard Zehr. The process of restorative justice necessitates a shift in responsibility for addressing crime. In a restorative justice process, the citizens who have been affected by a crime must take an active role in addressing that crime. Although law professionals may have secondary roles in facilitating the restorative justice process, it is the citizens who must take up the majority of the responsibility in healing the pains caused by crime. Restorative justice is a very broad subject and has many other topics inside of it. The main goal of the restorative justice system is to focus on the needs of the victims, the offenders, and the community, and focus
I am going to write this paper on tort reform, what it is and its overarching role in the documentary. Tort Reform is defined as “proposed changes in the civil justice system that aim to reduce the ability of victims to bring litigation or to reduce damages they can receive”. Another theme that I believe ties in really well with the idea of tort reform is the idea of how big of an influence money has in politics. Many people would agree that there are a lot of companies that would want tort reform so they don’t have to worry about losing millions of dollars.
after suffering harm from the acts of the other party (Turner, 2013). A tort is a civil wrong
Retribution – is a correctional aim which is to hold a person who has committed a crime accountable for committing a crime against another or society in the form of punishment. (Stojkovic and Lovell 2013) What we look at in retribution is when someone is punished there is legitimacy in the punishment of a particular crime that was committed. Some of the pros of retribution are retribution can make a person or society feel safer or a feeling of justice being served when a person is punished for the crime they committed. The con of retribution is during court proceedings the prosecution and the offender’s lawyer may come to a plea agreement which could give the offender a lesser sentence than what he or she would have gotten originally. (Stojkovic and Lovell 2013)
In order to critically assess the approach of the courts in allowing damages for pure economic loss in cases of negligence. One must first outline what pure economic loss is and what it consists off. Pure economic loss can be defined as financial loss or damage to one party caused by another party due to their negligence however the negligent act that is carried out is ‘purely’ economic and has no relation to any physical damage caused to any person or property. Numerous cases illustrate pure economic loss and losses that are deemed to be ‘purely economic’ are demonstrated under the Accidents Act 1976.
This is where the individuals exercise their rights to seek compensations for damages or injuries. Also this is a law that is not controlled by the judges based on previous things that had happen in the past.
Damages – if the other party cause’s drastic damages that cost the other party or affect it negatively than the other party can sue and take them to court of law, and the court may claim that the affected party may be paid and be taken back to its original position as it was
In our given scenario we are asked to discuss legal principles influencing the likelihood of any successful action against Steve in the grounds of negligence. Steve’s negligent driving caused a series of events that caused losses to the other people presented in the scenario and they take actions against Steve in the grounds of negligence. At first we must understand what negligence is. The tort of negligence provides the potenti...
From the 1990s, the reports that cover the compensation cases increased dramatically in the mass media (Almond, 2004). There is a view that a huge number of tort cases in the ‘compensation culture’ are unjustified and unfair. In the mid-1990s, the term ‘compensation culture’ first appeared in a famous British newspaper (Levin, 1993). Actually, this is an extreme view, which will be criticized in this paper. This essay emphasizes the compensation culture is a myth (Morris, 2007). There are three reasons: Firstly, the data of the tort claims declined in recent years. Secondly, some victims do not receive the compensation or enough compensation that they deserve. Thirdly, the mass media and public organizations created the ‘compensation