Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

Punitive damages reviewed; Haslip's effect

Article Abstract:

Observers thought the Supreme Court's Mar 1991 decision in Pacific Mutual Insurance Co v Haslip would have a watershed effect on punitive damages rulings, but this has not materialized, and it has had little effect on lower courts since it was issued. Courts at both the state and federal levels have approved procedures long in use in 17 of the 20 punitive damages cases appealed since Haslip. While Haslip has prompted extra questioning of states' processes, long-used methods and standards for punitive damages are still passing constitutional scrutiny.

Author: Gibbins, Bob
Publisher: ALM Media, Inc.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1992

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Punitive damages reform moves to the state arena; with federal tort reform shelved, state legislatures have beaten Congress to the punch on exemplary damages caps

Article Abstract:

Many states have tired at federal efforts at tort reform and the capping of punitive damages and undertaken the effort on their own. Just in 1995, nine states have enacted tort reform laws addressing the issue of punitive damages. The bills offered in Illinois and Texas were particularly strict at capping such damages. The attempt at federal tort reform which Pres Clinton just vetoed was called the Common Sense Product Liability Legal Reform Act of 1996 but state laws may have preempted the need for national reform.

Author: Turner, Marshall S., Houghton, Andrew T.
Publisher: ALM Media, Inc.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1996
states

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Circuits split over whether a heightened showing of egregiousness is necessary to recover Title VII punitive damages, and over use of statutory damages caps

Article Abstract:

The Civil Rights Act of 1991 allowed those victimized by intentional religious or sex discrimination to recover both compensatory and punitive damages, and Section 1981a(b)(1) provides that a nongovernmental employer found guilty of malicious or recklessly indifferent discrimination must pay punitive damages. The federal circuit courts differ on the plaintiff's burden in proving such discrimination.

Author: Hillman, Peter N., Berk, Romy E.
Publisher: ALM Media, Inc.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1998
Employment discrimination

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Laws, regulations and rules, Exemplary damages, Punitive damages, Limitation of damages, Limitations of damages, United States
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: The U.S. Supreme Court will settle a circuit court split over whether punitive damages may be awarded in securities arbitrations governed by New York law
  • Abstracts: Prosecutions and punitives for malpractice rise, slowly; convictions of physicians as well as punitive damage awards against them in cases of death have gained notice, but remain rare
  • Abstracts: The high court erases a stigma. Decisions expand equal protection rights; court ends exclusion of women at VMI and grants equal protection status to gay men and lesbians
  • Abstracts: Judge oks 'violence' act, the commerce clause is invoked to sustain the Violence Against Women Act. Judge Sarokin decries criticism of bench, quits; 3d Circuit judge says some are seeking to 'Willie Hortonize' the courts
  • Abstracts: The 'joint work' provision of the Copyright Act could be used by companies to assert authorship of certain works not covered by 'work for hire' arrangements
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.