When someone is injured at the fault of someone else, they may sue them for compensatory damages in order to repay their losses. Sometimes, they may also want to sue for punitive damages in order to punish the other person for their negligence. That being said, punitive damages in California are subject to rules and regulations that limit when a person may recover them. Punitive damages are reserved for when a defendant is proven to be guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice. The goal is to both punish the defendant for their behavior, and to deter them and others from performing that type of behavior in the future. These damages are not based on measurable losses but rather how blatant and malicious a defendant\u2019s acts are. Punitive damages are awarded separately and in addition to compensatory damages.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Punitive damages exist to punish the defendant for the actions they committed which led to the injury of another. They also set a precedent and act as a deterrent to prevent them or anyone else from doing likewise in the future. They are awarded in situations of malicious intent or extreme recklessness. Punitive damages are based on the nature of the behavior and the financial worth of the defendant.<\/p>\n
Punitive damages are not the same as economic and non-economic compensatory damages. They are not meant to compensate the plaintiff, only to punish the defendant. Punitive damages are a matter of public policy which dictate what actions area considered so reprehensible that additional damages should be awarded. They are awarded separately from compensatory damages but cannot be awarded without them.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Compensatory damages are meant to repay the plaintiff for their losses. They can be economic damages such as medical bills, or non-economic damages such as pain and suffering<\/a>. The goal of compensatory damages<\/a> is to make the victim whole again.<\/p>\n Punitive damages are meant to serve as an extra punishment on top of compensatory damages. They are awarded when the plaintiff proves that the defendant acted with such disregard for the victim that their actions exceed normal negligence. The goal of punitive damages is to punish wrongdoers and make an example of them to deter others from doing the same.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Punitive damages are not always applicable. Sometimes an accident is just an accident, even if someone was at fault. Punitive damages in California are limited to situations of specific and severe misconduct that call for punishment and deterrence.<\/p>\n California Civil Code 3294 allows for punitive damages to be awarded when a plaintiff substantially proves with clear and convincing evidence that the defendant acted with malice, oppression, or fraud. In these situations, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff. This means that it is the plaintiff\u2019s responsibility to provide proof of the defendant\u2019s guilt, not the responsibility of the defendant to provide proof of their innocence.<\/p>\n Malice refers to intentional conduct meant to cause harm or with disregard to the harm it could cause. Oppression refers to conduct that causes unjust hardship with intentional disregard to a person\u2019s rights. Fraud refers to conduct that causes harm through deception, misrepresentation, or concealment of pertinent information.<\/p>\n In a personal injury claim, the plaintiff must also prove that their injuries were caused in connection to the defendant committing an act of malice, oppression, or fraud. In an employment claim against a corporate employer, the malicious, oppressive, or fraudulent action must be committed by an officer, director, or managing agent of the corporation.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Compensatory damages only require proof by preponderance of the evidence. This means that their claims must be considered to be more likely than not that the claim of negligence is true.<\/p>\n Punitive damages, however, require proof by clear and convincing evidence. This means that their claims must be proven<\/a> a much higher degree of probability.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n According to California Civil Code 3294<\/a> \u201c\u2026 where it is proven by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant has been guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice, the plaintiff, in addition to the actual damages, may recover damages<\/a> for the sake of example and by way of punishing the defendant.\u201d<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Generally, courts do not award punitive damages for negligence. However, punitive damages may be awarded in situations of willful and wanton negligence. The California Supreme Court case Donnelly v. Southern Pacific Co. found that when a defendant acts \u201cintentionally with the knowledge that it will probably cause harm\u201d they may be subject to additional punishment in the form of punitive damages.<\/p>\n In general negligence cases, the defendant might not know that their actions or inactions could cause harm. In cases of willful and wanton negligence, the defendant is aware of the possible and even probable consequences of their actions. Cases where punitive damages were awarded involved situations where the defendant acted not just reprehensively, but also intentionally. While the actions must be intentional, there are situations where the defendant did not intend to cause harm, but deliberately acted without regard for the harm they could cause. In these cases, a defendant\u2019s negligence would most likely be considered \u201cwillful and wanton.\u201d<\/p>\n <\/p>\n There are several types of situations where California courts may award punitive damages.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n There are a few things people might not realize about punitive damages. The first is that they are not awarded alone. They are a separate category but must be awarded in addition to some other type of compensatory or nominal damages. This is because punitive damages are awarded in cases where some kind of harm has been caused.<\/p>\n Despite what many people seem to think, punitive damages are actually very rarely awarded. According to a report from the United States Department of Justice:<\/p>\n Punitive damage awards are also smaller than people may think. According to that same report:<\/p>\n About half of the cases where punitive damages were awarded will be subject to judicial review. This can reduce the final amount of the award.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n For the most part, California law does not allow recovery for punitive damages in wrongful death cases. The main exception to this rule is in cases where the defendant is convicted of felony murder.<\/p>\n Punitive damages are sometimes awarded with a survivorship claim. Under California Code of Civil Procedure 377.34 the decedent\u2019s personal representative or successor may be entitled to punitive damages if the decedent would have been entitled to them had they survived.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n First, the plaintiff must request an award of punitive damages, though they may not specify how much they are seeking. Sometimes, the punitive damages are part of the same proceeding as the defendant\u2019s liability, or the defendant may ask that it be bifurcated which means it would be tried separately. In the instance of a separate trial for punitive damages, evidence regarding the defendant\u2019s wealth is not presented until after the plaintiff wins the case and the defendant is found guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice by a jury. This is to prevent swaying the jury based on how much the defendant can afford to pay.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n When a defendant is found guilty of malice, oppression, or fraud, they may have to pay some amount of punitive damages. There are many things that are taken into consideration when determining how much they have to pay.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n While there is no fixed standard<\/a> dictating how punitive damage awards are calculated<\/a>, there are many common factors taken into consideration:<\/p>\n While a jury will want to be sure that the amount awarded is appropriate in regard to the defendant\u2019s finances, they may not impose higher damages simply because a defendant can afford it.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n California state law does not have an official cap on punitive damages in personal injury cases. However, The Supreme Court of the United States held in State Farm v. Campbell that \u201cgrossly excessive or arbitrary punishments\u201d are forbidden under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. They determined that punitive damages must be reasonably proportionate to the compensatory damages and the reprehensibility of the defendant\u2019s conduct.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Have you been injured due to someone else\u2019s reprehensible behavior? If that behavior amounted to malice, oppression, or fraud, you may be entitled to punitive damages. Punitive damages are an additional award separate from whatever amount of compensatory damages you may receive for your injury. Our personal injury attorneys<\/a> are experienced and dedicated to helping you seek justice. If you believe you may be entitled to recover punitive damages, call Mesriani Law Group for a free consultation today.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \n\t\t\t\t\t\tIf someone is seeking punitive damages in California, there are some steps they need to take. First, they must make a specific request for an award of punitive damages. Then, they must prove with clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is guilty of malice, oppression, or fraud. If the defendant is found guilty, the jury will determine a fair and appropriate amount to punish the defendant and deter them and others from the same conduct in the future. <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/section>\n\t\t \n\t\t\t\t\t\tAccording to California state law, punitive damages are generally uninsurable. This is because punitive damages are specifically a punishment and deterrent for deliberate and intentional actions. Not only do many insurance policies generally not cover intentional wrongdoing, but if they did pay those damages, it would negate the effectiveness of both the punishment and the deterrent. <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/section>\n\t\t \n\t\t\t\t\t\tAccording to the California Supreme Court, there are three things that must be taken into consideration when reviewing punitive damages: \n\t\t\t\t\t\tPunitive damages are determined when the plaintiff provides clear and convincing proof that their injuries were caused in some way by the defendant acting in malice, oppression, or fraud. If the jury finds the defendant guilty, they assess factors of the situation such as the severity of the defendant\u2019s behavior to calculate a fair monetary amount. <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/section>\n\t\t\nWhen are Punitive Damages Awarded?<\/h2>\n
What is Clear and Convincing Evidence?<\/h3>\n
Situations Where Punitive Damages Can Be Awarded<\/h2>\n
\n
Willful & Wanton Negligence<\/h3>\n
Examples of When Punitive Damages Have Been Awarded<\/h2>\n
\n
Punitive Damage Considerations<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
Punitive Damages in a Wrongful Death Claim<\/h2>\n
What is the Process for Seeking Punitive Damages<\/h2>\n
Calculating Punitive Damages<\/h2>\n
Factors That Impact Punitive Damage Calculations<\/h3>\n
\n
Limits on Punitive Damages<\/h2>\n
Call Mesriani Law Group Today to Discuss the Potential to Be Awarded Punitive Damages<\/h2>\n
Punitive Damage FAQs<\/span><\/h2>\n
How does California handle punitive damages?<\/h4>
Are Punitive damages covered in California?<\/h4>
What three things must a court consider in reviewing punitive damages?<\/h4>
\n\u2022 Degree of reprehensibility of the defendant's conduct
\n\u2022 Disparity between the harm suffered by the plaintiff and the punitive damages award
\n\u2022 Difference between the punitive damages awarded and the civil penalties imposed in comparable cases <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/section>\n\t\t How do you determine punitive damages?<\/h4>