Punitive Damages Reform: HB 442 (1987): Mont. Code Ann. § 27-1-221(5).
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 “actual fraud” or “actual malice.” Requires the determination of awards for punitive damages to be made in a separate proceeding. Permits the admissibility of evidence of a defendant’s net worth only during the proceeding for the determination of punitive damages. Requires a judge to review all punitive damages awards and to issue an opinion on his decision to increase or decrease an award, or to let it stand.
Latest News
View all news
Congressional Hearing on Bankruptcy to Address Mass Tort Litigation
ATRA Reiterates Support for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Use to Address Mass Tort Litigation, Urges Meaningful Dialogue Amid Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing
Climate Lawsuits Don’t Belong In State Courts
By maintaining the clear distinction between the judiciary and policymaking, the court can help us navigate this critical issue with prudence and responsibility, safeguarding a sustainable future for all.
House Oversight Hearing on Third-Party Litigation Financing Applauded by ATRA
The lack of oversight and transparency around third-party litigation funding threatens the integrity of our legal system
Georgia Legislature Needs to Address Lawsuit Abuses
Together, let’s forge a legal landscape that makes equitable access to justice a living reality for all Georgians.
Private Attorneys Hired by State Should Not Reap a Windfall at Taxpayers’ Expense
This is an opportunity to reassess the practices and regulations surrounding private-attorney contracting and to enact reforms that promote fairness, transparency and value for taxpayer dollars.
ATRA Applauds 4th Circuit’s Denial of En Banc Review in Bestwall Litigation
Allowing the company to continue the bankruptcy process will help ensure equitable and efficient resolution in complex mass tort claims