Personal Injury Lawyer in Colorado: Understanding Punitive Damages

Punitive damages are rarely granted. Generally, you are more likely to obtain a punitive damage award if the case involves products liability, wrongful death, or medical malpractice. Still, any personal injury claim has the potential for punitive damages if malice or recklessness can be proven. 

To better understand when punitive damages could be awarded, here are two examples of cases where large punitive damages were awarded. 

1. Product Liability. In Robinson v. RJ Reynolds, $23.6 billion dollars in punitive damages were awarded to the Robinson family, which was in addition to $16.9 million in compensatory damages. This was a tobacco case. Michael Johnson, Sr. died from lung cancer, which his family proved was caused by cigarettes manufactured and distributed by Reynolds. No greater harm exists than causing someone to die. Compensation was awarded to the family for the loss of their loved one and all the expenses, pain, and suffering that stemmed from it. Punitive damages, however, were awarded because of RJ Reynolds’ alleged lies and cover-up. On appeal, the punitive damages were reduced to $2 million (after the matter was retried). 
   
   
2. Wrongful Death. In Calandro v. Radius HealthCare Center, $12.5 million in punitive damages were awarded to Genevieve Calandro’s family, which was in addition to $1.5 million in compensatory damages. Ms. Calandro was a patient at Radius HealthCare Center, a nursing home. She fell and was taken to the hospital. At the hospital, it was determined that she had been a victim of nursing home abuse and neglect. She was found with pressure ulcers on her backside, a urinary tract infection, kidney failure, appendicitis, and other ailments, which had all gone untreated. She died at the hospital. The family proved her death was the result of this negligence. 
   
   

Punitive damages are not always in the millions and billions. It is all dependent on the jurisdiction, facts, and circumstances as well as policy considerations. 

When applying punitive damages, in yet another U.S. Supreme Court case State Farm v. Campbell (2003), the Court said that lower courts should look to the reprehensibility of the wrong and determine an acceptable punitive-to-compensatory damage ratio. The Court did not impose a bright line ratio. Instead, it pointed out that the ratio should be based on how egregious the act was and how hard it is to determine non-economic damages. But also, a punitive to compensatory ratio greater than 9:1 is likely in violation of the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution. For example, if a plaintiff was awarded $100,000 in compensatory damages and $900,000 in punitive damages––the latter is likely in violation of the due process clause.