Punitive Damages Reform: (1987): Ala. Code § 6-11-20.
Requires a plaintiff to show by “clear and convincing” evidence
Requires a plaintiff to show by “clear and convincing” evidence that a defendant acted with “wanton” conduct for the recovery of punitive damages. Limits the award of punitive damages to $250,000. The statute setting a $250,000 limit on punitive damages awards violated the right to jury trial under the State Constitution. Henderson v. Alabama Power Co., 627 So. 2d 878 (Ala. 1993). Requires trial and appellate judges to review all punitive damages awards and reduce those that are excessive based on the facts of the case. The Alabama Supreme Court held the judicial review of all awards unconstitutional in Armstrong v. Roger’s Outdoor Sports, Inc., May 10, 1991.
Latest News
View all news
‘Highly Unusual’ Rehearing of Louisiana Case Raises Judicial Independence Concerns
Louisiana Supreme Court Waffles Under Political Pressure, ATRA Brief Urges Court to Stand Strong
America’s Top 9 Worst Judicial Hellholes®
Left unchecked, these jurisdictions will continue dragging down economic growth and undermining justice through rampant lawsuit abuse.
ATRA Commends J&J’s Plan to Resolve Notorious Talc Lawsuits
Claimants Given Opportunity to Vote on Plan; Judge to Reconsider Scientific Validity of Plaintiffs’ Experts
The Lab Whose Junk Science Is Fueling a Frenzy of Litigation
Legitimate consumer protection demands sound science and impartial analysis — not distorted data designed to manufacture lawsuits.
Lawsuit Advertising Frenzy Fuels Georgia’s Litigation Epidemic
Law Firms Spent $168M+ on 2.2M Ads in Georgia
Trial Lawyers’ Dual Grip on Pennsylvania Politics and Public Opinion Revealed in New ATRA Reports
ATRA’s Latest Studies Reveal Financial Influence and Lack of Transparency in Pennsylvania’s Campaign Finance Systems