noting the early use of punitive damages for the purposes of “redressing affronts to personal feelings not susceptible of measurement ... financing the cost of deserving litigation where only small compensatory damages can be expected, diverting the plaintiffs desire for revenge into peaceful channels, and serving as punishment for and deterrence from socially disapproved conduct.”
How later courts described this case
- noting the early use of punitive damages for the purposes of “redressing affronts to personal feelings not susceptible of measurement ... financing the cost of deserving litigation where only small compensatory damages can be expected, diverting the plaintiffs desire for revenge into peaceful channels, and serving as punishment for and deterrence from socially disapproved conduct.”
- holding that the burden of proof for punitive damages in products liability cases is clear and convincing evidence
- holding punitive damages proper where manufacturer is shown “to have become aware of danger and to have done nothing; deliberately closing its eyes.”
- noting that the power to engage in “extensive law-making” with respect to state law is one that is entrusted to state legislature and state courts rather than federal courts
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
HAYS, Circuit Judge
(dissenting):
I dissent.