Punitive Damages Reform: (1987): Ala. Code § 6-11-20.
Requires a plaintiff to show by “clear and convincing” evidence
Requires a plaintiff to show by “clear and convincing” evidence that a defendant acted with “wanton” conduct for the recovery of punitive damages. Limits the award of punitive damages to $250,000. The statute setting a $250,000 limit on punitive damages awards violated the right to jury trial under the State Constitution. Henderson v. Alabama Power Co., 627 So. 2d 878 (Ala. 1993). Requires trial and appellate judges to review all punitive damages awards and reduce those that are excessive based on the facts of the case. The Alabama Supreme Court held the judicial review of all awards unconstitutional in Armstrong v. Roger’s Outdoor Sports, Inc., May 10, 1991.
ATRA President Tiger Joyce writes how companies that end arbitration face the risk of consumer class actions, in the face of plaintiffs firms ramping up mass arbitration proceedings.
We are saddened to hear of former Missouri state Senator Ed Emery’s untimely death. Senator Emery was not only a champion of tort reform, but a pillar in his community. […]
The New York trial bar may get yet another gift from the state lawmakers seemingly tied around their finger.
Lawsuit abuse across the U.S. results in more than $160 billion in excessive tort costs
Financial benefit of reforming Missouri’s tort system could support an additional 20k+ jobs & $3.38B in increased economic activity
$7 million spent in Quarter 1 of 2021 to air nearly 61,000 local legal services TV ads in Illinois