Punitive Damages

Punitive damages are awarded not to compensate a plaintiff, but to punish a defendant for intentional or malicious misconduct and to deter similar future misconduct.

The Problem

While punitive damages awards are infrequent, their frequency and size have grown greatly in recent years. More importantly, they are routinely asked for today in civil lawsuits. The difficulty of predicting whether punitive damages will be awarded by a jury in any particular case, and the marked trend toward astronomically large amounts when they are awarded, have seriously distorted settlement and litigation processes and have led to wildly inconsistent outcomes in similar cases.

ATRA’s Position

ATRA supports state legislation that: establishes a liability “trigger” that reflects the intentional tort origins and quasi‑criminal nature of punitive damages awards ‑ “actual malice;” requires “clear and convincing evidence” to establish punitive damages liability; and requires proportionality in punitive damages so that the punishment fits the offense. ATRA supports federal legislation that addresses the special problem of multiple punitive damages awards. Such legislation would protect against unfair overkill, guard against possible due process violations, and help preserve the ability of future claimants to recover basic out‑of‑pocket expenses and damages for their pain and suffering.

Search Through ATRA Reforms

Search through all of ATRA's reforms around Punitive Damages
Punitive Damages Reform: Clear and Convincing Evidence” Wangen v. Ford Motor Co., 294 N.W.2d 437 (Wis. 1980).

Requires a plaintiff to prove punitive damages by “clear and convincing evidence.”

Wisconsin
Punitive Damages Reform: SB 402 (1987)
Limits the award of punitive damages to $350,000.  The Virginia Court of Appeals upheld the constitutionality of this statute in Wackenhut Applied Tec...
Virginia
Punitive Damages Reform: SB 24 (1989).
Requires a plaintiff to show by “clear and convincing” evidence that a defendant’s actions were “knowing and reckless.”  (The law previously required ...
Utah
Punitive Damages Reform: HB 4 (2003).

Requires unanimous jury verdict to award punitive damages.  Specifies that jury must be so instructed.

Texas
Punitive Damages Reform: SB 25 (1995): Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ 41.003, 41.008.
Limits the award of punitive damages to the greater of $200,000 or two times the award of economic damages plus non‑economic damages up to $750,000.  ...
Texas
Punitive Damages Reform: SB 5 (1987).
Requires a plaintiff to show that a defendant’s actions were fraudulent, malicious, or grossly negligent.  Limits the award of punitive damages to the...
Texas
Punitive Damages Reform: S.B. 222 (2013)
Authorizes the award of punitive damages in a civil action against a defendant based on vicarious liability only if the finder of fact determines by c...
Tennessee
Punitive Damages Reform: HB 2008 / SB 1522 (2011); Amended Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-39-104.
Limits punitive damages to two times compensatory damages or $500,000, whichever is greater.  The limits on punitive damages do not apply if the defen...
Tennessee
Punitive Damages Reform: Hodges v. S.C. Toof & Co., 833 S.W.2d 896 (Tenn. 1992).

Requires a plaintiff to prove punitive damages by “clear and convincing” evidence.

Tennessee
Punitive Damages Reform: SB 280 (1986): S.D. Codified Laws Ann. § 21-1-4.1.

Requires a plaintiff to prove by “clear and convincing” evidence that a defendant acted with “willful, wanton, or malicious” conduct.

South Dakota


Punitive Damages News and Press

Explore ATRA's most recent press releases and blogs around Punitive Damages

Lawmakers Denounced for Pushing Punitive Damages in Last-Minute Amendment

This week, Illinois General Assembly Assistant Majority Leader Jay Hoffman...

ATRA Brief Calls on SCOTUS to Review Near Limitless Per Violation Civil Penalties

The American Tort Reform Association (ATRA) filed a friend of the court br...

Governor signs law on punitive damages, merchandising act

Governor Mike Parson signed into law changes to the legal make that was ch...

Search Resources

Search through all of ATRA's Amicus Briefs, Reports, and Other Resources around Punitive Damages
Search All
States
Status
Post Types
Date
Bio-Lab, Inc. v. Fannie Tartt et al.
(GA, filed January 20, 2026): Arguing that traditional tort law and persuasive decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court and numerous state high courts do ...
Georgia
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Sanctionable: The unsupported, exaggerated, and suspicious claims plaguing our nation’s courts
There is growing concern that many lawsuits filed in our nation’s courts are unsupported, involve manufactured or exaggerated injuries, or stem from ...
California, Florida, Louisiana, New York, Pennsylvania
Lyon v. Riverside Methodist Hospital et. al.
(OH., filed October 7, 2025): Arguing that the Court should review the lower court’s decision because the Court should comprehensively address the co...
Ohio
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Atlas Turner, Inc. v. Welch
(U.S., filed September 22, 2025): Arguing the Court should review the use of receiverships by the South Carolina asbestos court.  The receivership pr...
SCOTUS
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Letter to House Judiciary Committee re: Protection of Lawful Commerce in Stone Slab Products Act
This letter was submitted on behalf of the American Tort Reform Association to express our support for H.R. 5437, the “Protection of Lawful Commerce ...
California
Letter to DOJ re: RFI on State Laws Having Significant Adverse Effects on the National Economy or Interstate Commerce
Re: Request for Information on State Laws Having Significant Adverse Effects on the National Economy or Significant Adverse Effects on Interstate Com...
Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish
(U.S., filed September 12, 2025): Arguing that the Louisiana coastal litigation proves the importance of federal officer removal.  The Government law...
SCOTUS
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
Suncor Energy Inc., et. al. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, et. al.
(U.S., filed September 12, 2025): Urging the Court to grant the petition for certiari.  Arguing that global climate change is not traditional st...
SCOTUS
  • Court Granted Cert iconCourt Granted Cert
Sommerville v. Union Carbide and Covestro LLC
(4th Circ., filed September 9, 2025): Supporting rehearing en banc. Arguing that Article III standing requires an injury that is concrete and particu...
4th Circuit
  • Court Ruled Against ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled Against ATRA's Position
Ortiz v. Daimler Trucks North America LLC
(CA., filed September 4, 2025): Urging the court to review the lower court’s decision because in combination with the decision in Gilead, it threaten...
California
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided



The American Tort Reform Association is the nation’s first organization dedicated exclusively to reforming the civil justice system through education and legislative enactment.

To receive occasional updates from ATRA, enter your email address:
By subscribing, you agree to our Privacy Policy and consent to receive updates.
© 2026 ATRA. All rights reserved.