Need Help on this. Thanks Question 1: Based on the cases, the Chrysler Case and

Question

Need Help on this. Thanks

Question 1: Based on the cases, the Chrysler Case and exhibit cases, should punitive damages be more strictly limited or expanded? Fully explain in 200 words or more.

CASE 8-3 CLARK v. CHRYSLER CORPORATION U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT 2006 U.S. APP. LEXIS 2435 Charles Clark was fatally injured in an automobile accident when he pulled into an intersection in front of an oncoming seat belt and was consequently ejected from his vehicle. His wife sued Chrysle, claiming that its pickup truck was defectively and negligently designed vehicle and collided with it. He was not wearing a After a three-day trial, the jury rendered a unanimous verdict in favor of Mrs. Clark on claims of strict liability, negligence, and failure to warn. The jury found Chrysler and Mr Clark each 50% at fault, returning a verdict of $471,258.26 in compensatory damages and S3,000,000 in punitive damages. The court entered a judgment against Chrysler for $3,235,629.13, reflecting 50% of the compensatory damages plus the $3 million punitive damages award After a series of appeals, the last being an appeal of the trial court's motion to deny the defendant's motion for remittitur, the case finally landed at the Circuit Court of Appeals on the issue whether the jury verdict was constitutionally excessive. JUDGE JANE A. RESTANI: The Court in State Farm elaborated on the three Gore guideposts that courts must consider when reviewing punitive damage awards Namely, (1) the degree of reprehensibility of the defendant's misconduct, (2) the disparity between the actual or potential harm suffered by the plaintiff and the punitive damage award, and (3) the difference between the punitive damages awarded by the jury and the civil penalties authorized or imposed in comparable cases.... In light of State Farm.. we conclude that the S3 million award here is constitutionally excessive An application of the Gore guideposts to the facts of this case reveals that a punitive damage award approximately equal to twice the amount of compensatory damages, or $471,258.26, would comport with the requirements of due process.

Explanation / Answer

Answer:

The purpose of punitive damages is to deter bad actions on the part of possible future defendants and to make sure the defendant is appropriately punished for any wrongdoing. But in my opinion punitive damages should not be made unlimited and unreasonable. If this is the case the whole idea behind them gets lost and the seriousness of the case also gets diluted. The suffering and pain that one has gone through should get some relief by compensatory money but it should also not become a benchmark for all not so serious cases to get money out of everything.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse N
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.