Punitive Damages Reform: SB 263 (1995)
Codifies factors that the jury must consider in awarding punitive
Codifies factors that the jury must consider in awarding punitive damages. Provides that when a jury finds by “clear and convincing” evidence that the defendant: (1) acted in “reckless disregard for the rights of others,” the award is limited to the greater of $100,000 or actual damages awarded; or (2) acted intentionally and with malice, the award is limited to $500,000; two times the award of actual damages; or the increased financial benefit derived by the defendant or insurer as a direct result of the conduct causing injury. The limit does not apply if the court finds evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant acted intentionally and with malice in conduct life‑threatening to humans.
Latest News
View all news
Groups Urge Congressional Scrutiny of D.C. Attorney General’s Use of Private Attorneys
Concerns Mount Over Outside Counsel Contracts and Litigation Agendas
America’s $367 Billion Lawsuit Epidemic
The Hidden Tax Crushing Families and Businesses
$745 Million Verdict in Coastal Litigation Exemplifies Louisiana’s ‘Judicial Hellhole®’ Status
Excessive Litigation Costs Residents $1,011 Annually and Jeopardizes 40,000 Jobs Each Year
Alarming Expansion in Public Nuisance Litigation Revealed by ATRA Report
From Social Media to Car Thefts, New Litigation Trends Threaten Entire Industries
Georgia Legislature Passes Landmark Tort Reform Bill
ATRA Applauds Passage, Anticipates Governor’s Signature on SB 68
The trial lawyer playbook: How aggressive advertising and junk science are costing Californians
In 2024, legal services ads hit $164 million in LA, part of a 39% national rise, fueling aggressive marketing, third-party funding, and straining California’s economy and courts.