The Louisiana Supreme Court’s Alarming U-turn
The Pelican State deserves a judicial system that stands firmly on principles — not one swayed by the most recent political winds.
Dziadek v. Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company
(8th Cir., Filed Feb. 21, 2017): Arguing that above-market prejudgment interest should not be included in the denominator when calculating the ratio of punitive to compensatory damages. Above-market prejudgment interest overstates the actual harm suffered by the plaintiff and already serves a punitive function. If the Court concludes that some amount of prejudgment interest should be included in the denominator of the ratio, it should use a market rate for determining the amount and add the balance of the prejudgment interest- the effect of which is entirely punitive-to the numerator.
On August 15, 2017, the court ruled against ATRA’s position and affirmed the award of punitive damages.
Latest News
View all news
Trial Lawyers’ Latest Target: Life-Sustaining Baby Formula
Judges must recognize these cases for what they are: a cynical attempt to turn the suffering of families into a litigation jackpot.
Wall Street Journal: Junk Science Sometimes Still Prevails in Court
A recent Delaware case shows that not all states follow the Supreme Court’s 1993 Daubert ruling.
ATRA Applauds Utah AG Candidate Rudy Bautista for Signing Transparency Pledge
Republican Candidate Derek Brown Urged to Sign Pledge
Baltimore’s Opioid Lawsuit Is Wrong Approach to Overdose Crisis
Maryland taxpayers should be assured that state leadership is working in their best interests and not those of entrepreneurial trial lawyers.
ATRA Sounds Alarm on Colorado’s ‘Lawsuit Inferno’ in New Report
ATRA Declares State a ‘Lawsuit Inferno’ Amid Liability Onslaught