If you’re injured in an accident or some similar incident, part of the benefit of suing for your rights is the aspect of punitive damages. Punitive damages are meant to discourage behavior that society deems wrong. Punitive damage claims also encourage plaintiff’s attorneys to handle your case.

We’ve all heard of the massive punitive damage claims, and some of them certainly shock our conscious. You’ll note though, that rarely any punitive damage awards are actually given. In most instances, the number of settled lawsuits outweighs the total number of verdicts. In general, attorneys evaluate claims based on the likelihood of success, and the facts of the case. Most attorneys seek just compensation for your injuries, and rarly seek to punish general accidents.

However, despite some of these self-imposed restrictions, individuals and organizations continue to lobby for "tort reform." It seems that the United States Supreme Court has shown its willingness to entertain caps on punitive damage awards. In Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker, the Court expressed favor with a 1:1 award in maritime law. Note that this is limited to admiralty or maritime cases, but similar reasoning is argued to favor a cap in other civil cases too.

Again, if the rationale is to punish unacceptable behavior, it hardly seems reasonable to significantly cap this punishment. Alternatively, it also seems illogical to punish someone’s behavior above a reasonable threshold (is 5 times too much?).