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
Trial Lawyers’ Rush Amendment Passes IL House in Early Morning Hours, Heads to Governor
ATRA’s statement on passage of Amendment 1 to Illinois House Bill 3360
IL Lawmakers Rush to Amend Bill for Trial Lawyers’ Gain, Ignore COVID-19 Liability Protections
ATRA’s statement on Amendment 1 to Illinois House Bill 3360
Statement Concerning Violent Mob Attack on U.S. Capitol
ATRA President Tiger Joyce released the following statement in response to the unprecedented attack on the U.S. Capitol building on January 6:
Congress Fails to Protect Small Businesses & Others from COVID-19 Liability
ATRA voices its disappointment as Congress fails to include liability protections in its latest COVID-19 relief package.
Courts in ‘Judicial Hellholes’ Less Likely to Abide by SCOTUS Precedent
ATRA President Tiger Joyce writes in this op-ed about a growing trend of state courts bucking SCOTUS precedent when it comes to personal jurisdiction.
Minnesota Slides Into ‘Judicial Hellholes’ Ranks Yet Again
Activism in AG’s office, Supreme Court’s acceptance of lawsuit funding and loose venue rules to blame