| dc.contributor.author | Hines, Laura J. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2011-06-01T01:03:03Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2011-06-01T01:03:03Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2004 | |
| dc.identifier.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). | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0022-8486 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1808/7576 | |
| dc.description.abstract | 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. [...] | |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | |
| dc.publisher | University of Akron School of Law | |
| dc.relation.hasversion | http://ssrn.com/abstract=1856327 | |
| dc.title | Due Process Limitations on Punitive Damages: Why State Farm Won't Be the Last Word | |
| dc.type | Article | |
| kusw.kuauthor | Hines, Laura J. | |
| kusw.kudepartment | Law | |
| kusw.oastatus | fullparticipation | |
| kusw.oaversion | Scholarly/refereed, publisher version | |
| kusw.oapolicy | This item meets KU Open Access policy criteria. | |
| dc.rights.accessrights | openAccess | |
