Punitive Damages Reform: HB 551 (1988)
Requires, for the award of punitive damages, a plaintiff to
Requires, for the award of punitive damages, a plaintiff to show by “clear and convincing” evidence that a defendant acted with oppression, fraud or malice. The 1988 punitive damages reform statute requiring a plaintiff to show that the defendant acted with “flagrant indifference to the rights of the plaintiff and with a subjective awareness that such conduct will result in human death or bodily harm” as a predicate for punitive damages liability violated “jural rights” provisions of the State Constitution. Williams v. Wilson, 972 S.W.2d 260 (Ky. 1998).
ATRA files amicus brief in support of Johnson & Johnson’s decision to appeal a 2019 $465 million judgment against the company, warning against the state attorney general’s expansive use of public nuisance law.
ATRA President Tiger Joyce spoke with Juliette Farley of the Southern California Record about Lawsuit Abuse Awareness Week and business interruption lawsuits.
ATRA urges SCOTUS to push back the on overly expansive approaches to jurisdiction shown by courts in Minnesota and Montana.
ATRA reports North Carolina attorney general candidates’ inaction on transparency code pledge.