Due Process Limitations on Punitive Damages: Why State Farm Won't Be the Last Word
![Thumbnail](/bitstream/handle/1808/7576/Hines_37AkronLRev779%282004%29.pdf.jpg?sequence=4&isAllowed=y)
View/ Open
Issue Date
2004Author
Hines, Laura J.
Publisher
University of Akron School of Law
Type
Article
Article Version
Scholarly/refereed, publisher version
Version
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1856327
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
During the past fifteen years, the U.S. Supreme Court has decided no fewer than seven cases in which it was asked to overturn punitive damage awards on a variety of constitutional grounds. Over the course of these decisions, the Due Process Clause has clearly emerged as the norm favored by the Court to test the procedures utilized by courts in imposing punitive damages, to evaluate the appropriateness of awarding such damages, and to calibrate the correct size of the award in a particular case. [...]
ISSN
0022-8486Collections
Citation
Laura J. Hines, Due Process Limitations on Punitive Damages: Why State Farm Won't Be the Last Word, 37 Akron Law Review 779-812 (2004).
Items in KU ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
We want to hear from you! Please share your stories about how Open Access to this item benefits YOU.