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.
August 11, 2022 (WASHINGTON) – Today, a Federal Magistrate Judge in the U.S. Eastern District Court of Michigan declared a mistrial after a jury convened in good faith and could […]
Energy producers face legal attacks from multiple angles, according to a new report. The report, released today by the American Tort Reform Foundation (ATRF), revealed that state attorneys general and […]
This op-ed was originally published by the Washington Examiner. Last month, an exclusive organization of judges, law professors, and lawyers called the American Law Institute spent a weekend in the nation’s […]
A bill addressing private attorney contracting was signed into law in Oklahoma on Friday. Governor Kevin Stitt (R) signed Senate Bill 984, which was sponsored by Senator Kim David (R) and Representative […]
ALI’s restatement of the law of ‘consumer contracts’ the latest in a surge of advocacy by the Institute
This op-ed was originally published by Law360. Once considered a scholarly organization that was safely above the fray in broader policy disputes, the American Law Institute has become an advocacy group, […]