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

No related legislation or reform items to display.



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
In Re Dupont de Nemours and Company C-8 Litigation
(6th Cir., filed June 20, 2016): Arguing that the court improperly blended specific and general causation and that there is a vital distinction betwee...
6th Circuit
  • Case Not Yet Decided iconCase Not Yet Decided
State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. United States ex rel. Rigsby No. 15-513
(U.S., filed August 8, 2016): Arguing that the blatant violation of the “seal” requirement by relator in a false claims case should result in a dismis...
SCOTUS
  • Court Ruled Against ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled Against ATRA's Position
Robinson v. Pfizer
(8th. Cir., filed September 12, 2016): Arguing that expansive venue laws has led to venue shopping and abuses in Missouri.  The Court must reign in th...
8th Circuit
  • Court Ruled Against ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled Against ATRA's Position
Cerveny v. Aventis
(10th Cir., filed September 19, 2016): Arguing that courts must ask whether federal law authorized the defendant to do what the plaintiff claims state...
10th Circuit
  • Court Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position
Hyundai Motor America v. Applewhite
(Miss., filed September 19, 2016): Arguing that under MS statute, evidence of a plaintiff’s nonuse of his seatbelt is admissible to refute a plaintiff...
Mississippi
  • Court Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position
Walker v. Ford
(Col., filed September 27, 2016): Arguing that the“risk-benefit” test for strict product liability incorporates the “consumer expectation” test, such ...
Colorado
  • Court Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position
Cottrell v. Alcon Laboratories
(3rd Cir., filed September 28, 2016): Arguing that the plaintiffs’ speculative claim that they might have paid less for a medication if defendan...
3rd Circuit
  • Court Ruled Against ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled Against ATRA's Position
Eike v. Allergan
(7th Cir., filed October 18, 2016): Arguing that the plaintiffs’ speculative claim that they might have paid less for a medication if defendants...
7th Circuit
  • Court Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position
BNSF v. Tyrell
(US., filed October 28, 2016): Arguing that the Montana Supreme Court improperly applied the Daimler personal jurisdiction requirements, which state t...
SCOTUS
  • Court Granted Cert iconCourt Granted Cert
In re Zoloft Litigation
(3rd Cir., filed October 18, 2016): Arguing that an expert cannot premise a causation analysis on a single statistically-significant association when ...
3rd Circuit
  • Court Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position iconCourt Ruled in Favor of ATRA's Position



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.