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).
Latest News
View all news
ATRA President: West Virginia Falling Behind on Legal Reform
Tiger Joyce Warns State Risks Losing Business to More Competitive Neighbors
South Carolina Governor Rallies Support for Key Legal Reform Package
Following Press Conference, S.B. 244 Set for Senate Floor Debate and Vote
ATRA Urges Gov. Youngkin to Veto HB 2351, Protect Right to Appeal in Virginia
Proposed Appeal Bond Cap Hike Threatens Fairness and Business Climate, ATRA Says
Trial Lawyer Advertising Soars to $2.5 Billion, Outpacing Pizza Restaurant Ads in Key Markets
New Report from the American Tort Reform Association Exposes Dangers of Aggressive Legal Services Advertising
Georgia Senate Acts to Restore Fairness in Civil Justice System
ATRA Applauds Passage of S.B. 68 to Address Phantom Damages, Jury Anchoring, Seat Belt Evidence Admissibility
ATRA Praises Lawmakers in ‘Judicial Hellhole®’ South Carolina for Pursuit of Tort Reform
Legislation Addresses Unfair Fault Allocation, Provides Juries with More Relevant Information