Reliance on that, for punitive damages purposes, is permissible.
But to the extent New GM employees actually had knowledge relevant to post-Sale accident claims or Independent Claims (even if it was inherited), plaintiffs in actions asserting such claims are free to base punitive damages claims on evidence of such knowledge to the extent nonbankruptcy law permits.
The Court rules simply that evidence of information obtained by New GM after the sale "gets through the gate," and may be relied upon, for punitive damages purposes, to the extent otherwise appropriate in the underlying actions.
It argues that punitive damages lose some of their appeal when leached of their retributivist content because, research in the field of moral psychology suggests, preventing future misconduct by other potential wrongdoers is not as psychologically satisfying as seeing the individual wrongdoer receive her just deserts.
Part I of this Comment argues that, contrary to the prevailing justification put forth by courts embracing the nonsurvivability rule, posthumous punitive damages do advance general deterrence.
THE GENERAL DETERRENT EFFECT OF PUNITIVE DAMAGES WHEN THE TORTFEASOR HAS DIED
Punitive damages are frequently bundled with compensatory damages in medical malpractice lawsuits.
In order to be awarded punitive damages, the plaintiff typically must prove that the defendant was grossly negligent, exhibiting wanton and reckless disregard of the risks.
The above hypothetical is taken from an actual case where punitive damages were allowed by the courts because of the egregious nature of misconduct.
Punitive Damages as a Mechanism of Retributive Justice
law's role in formulating an oil spill punitive damages regime for
Second, traditional rule advocates have long argued that refusal to award punitive damages on equitable causes is consistent with the principle that equity will award only what is due in justice and fairness without regard to the reprehensibility of defendant's conduct.
It is the height of legal paradox for a court to inform a litigant that he is estopped from asserting a legal claim for punitive damages because he cannot split his cause of action when in the prior proceeding for equitable relief he was not permitted to raise that very issue.
Justice David Souter, writing for the 5-3 majority, concluded that under maritime common law, punitive damages should be in a 1-to-1 ratio with compensatory damages.
A jury awarded the plaintiffs $287 million in compensatory damages and $5 billion in punitive damages against Exxon.