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
RFK Jr.’s Trial Lawyer Ties Raise Red Flags
We must ensure that all future health decisions are made with the best interests of all Americans in mind — not the financial motives of profit-seeking plaintiffs’ lawyers.
Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp Unveils Robust Tort Reform Package to Address Skyrocketing Costs
Proposed Reforms Aim to Slash $1,372 Annual ‘Tort Tax’ for Every Georgian
Louisiana’s “Judicial Hellhole®” Status Costs Residents $965 Annually In “Tort Tax”
Nuclear Verdicts® and Insurance Fraud Plague State’s Legal System
King County Courts Named ‘Judicial Hellhole®’ for First Time
New Report Ranks Seattle-Area Courts Among Worst in US
Michigan’s Legal Climate Kills 97,000 Jobs Annually, New Report Reveals
$1,046/Person ‘Tort Tax’ — Court Expands Liability, Michiganders Pay
Show Me Your Lawsuit: St. Louis Ranks 7th in ‘Judicial Hellholes®’ Report
Courts Threaten Preemie Formula Access, Residents Pay $1,475/Person/Year ‘Tort Tax’