Logically, there is no justification for having children's ability to knowingly engage in conduct turn on the social reprehensibility
of the conduct in question.
Campbell (41) in 2003, the Supreme Court has emphasized the primacy of the retribution rationale for punitive damages, holding that the reprehensibility
of the defendant's conduct is the first and "[pjerhaps the most important" constitutional guidepost in determining the reasonableness of a punitive damages award.
Much of the Court's opinion addresses evidence under the reprehensibility
guidepost concerning State Farm's national scheme to limit payouts on claims.
559, 574-75 (1996) (setting forth three "guideposts" to determine whether a punitive damages award is "grossly excessive": (1) the degree of reprehensibility
, (2) the disparity between the harm suffered and the award, and (3) the difference between the award and relevant regulatory penalties).
It's natural to evaluate the moral reprehensibility
The high court overturned the award ha the BMW case and provided three guidelines for determining whether punitive awards are excessive: the reprehensibility
of the defendant's conduct; whether there is a "reasonable ratio" between punitive and compensatory awards; and a comparison of the punitive damages with the civil or criminal penalties that could be imposed for the same acts.
1) The Conference was intended to showcase a new global community, characterized by a sweeping moral commonality on human rights issues and a condemnation of the now supposedly universally-recognized reprehensibility
of slavery and colonization.
These general beliefs about the varying degrees of reprehensibility
of crimes are supported by empirical evidence.
However, it qualified this holding by saying that juries may consider harm to nonparties in assessing the reprehensibility
of the defendant's conduct, which the Court has repeatedly said is the most important factor in determining the size of a punitive damages award.
By and large, the most important of the BMW factors is the degree of reprehensibility
of the defendant's actions since the amount of punitive damages imposed should reflect "'the enormity of [the] offense.
In light of these concerns, in Gore, supra, we instructed courts reviewing punitive damages to consider three guideposts: (1) the degree of reprehensibility
of the defendant's misconduct; (2) the disparity between the actual or potential harm suffered by the plaintiff and the punitive damages award; and (3) the difference between the punitive damages awarded by the jury and the civil penalties authorized or imposed in comparable cases.
apply three "guideposts"--the degree of reprehensibility