industries kelco disposal argued april decided june respondents joseph kelley kelco disposal filed suit petitioners collectively bfi federal district charging bfi antitrust violations interfering kelco contractual relations violation vermont tort law jury found bfi liable counts awarded kelco addition compensatory damages million punitive damages claim denying bfi motions district upheld jury punitive damages award appeals affirmed liability damages holding even eighth amendment applicable punitive damages awarded disproportionate constitutionally excessive held excessive fines clause eighth amendment apply punitive damages awards cases private parties constrain award government neither prosecuted action right recover share damages awarded pp primary concern drove framers eighth amendment potential governmental abuse prosecutorial power concern extent purposes civil damages nothing english history suggests excessive fines clause english bill rights direct ancestor eighth amendment intended apply damages awarded disputes private parties pp history use abuse england amercements including fact magna carta placed limits crown use excessive amercements basis concluding excessive fines clause limits civil jury ability award punitive damages magna carta aimed putting limits excesses royal power purposes clearly inapposite case private party receives exemplary damages another party government share recovery overlap civil criminal procedure time magna carta insignificant indications english courts never understood magna carta amercements clauses relevant private damages kind pp language excessive fines clause nature constitutional framework make clear eighth amendment places limits steps government may take individual fact punitive damages imposed aegis courts serve advance governmental interests punishment deterrence insufficient support applying excessive fines clause case private parties government vermont taken positive step punish criminal context used civil courts extract large payments forfeiture purpose raising revenue disabling individual pp bfi failed raise either district appeals question whether punitive damages award excessive due process clause fourteenth amendment consider effect due process award pp federal common law provide basis disturbing jury punitive damages award performing limited function federal appellate perceives federal standard compelling federal policy convinces accord considerable deference district decision order new trial district case properly instructed jury vermont law applied proper standard considering whether verdict excessive appeals correctly held district abuse discretion pp blackmun delivered opinion unanimous respect parts iii iv opinion respect part ii rehnquist brennan white marshall scalia kennedy joined brennan filed concurring opinion marshall joined post filed opinion concurring part dissenting part stevens joined post andrew frey argued cause petitioners briefs kenneth geller mark levy james holzhauer andrew pincus paul mcgrath bartow farr iii argued cause respondents brief joel klein paul smith robert hemley norman williams briefs amici curiae urging reversal filed city new york peter zimroth leonard koerner john hogrogian american national red cross et al rex lee carter phillips elizabeth esty charles rothfeld benjamin heineman philip lacovara fred hiestand arthur andersen et al leonard novello jon ekdahl carl liggio harris amhowitz kenneth lang eldon olson johnson higgins et al george clemon freeman john calvin jeffries james morris iii merrill lynch pierce fenner smith et al louis cohen lloyd cutler ronald greene robert dinerstein navistar international transportation david strauss john rupp pharmaceutical manufacturers association et al john reese geoffrey richard wagner smith richard kingham bruce kuhlik chamber commerce et al herbert fenster malcolm wheeler sherman cohn jeffrey robert white filed brief association trial lawyers america amicus curiae urging affirmance briefs amici curiae filed alliance american insurers et al jack blaine phillip stano craig berrington john crosby john nangle kenneth nails james bradner joe peel theresa sorota bethlehem steel et al martin kaufman california trial lawyers association joseph remcho harvey levine amy langerman william denton cbs et al cameron devore marshall nelson douglas jacobs richard schmidt bruce rich harvey lipton bruce sanford consumers union et al andrew popper golden rule insurance et al darrell richey douglas martin thomas norman goodyear tire rubber theodore olson larry simms illinois trial lawyers association robert cooney insurance consumer action network roger metromedia theodore olson larry simms national association mutual insurance companies bert nettles forrest latta geoffrey hazard martha hoffmann sanders bruce ennis donald bersoff sidney fuller justice blackmun delivered opinion face questions whether excessive fines clause eighth amendment applies award punitive exemplary damages whether award million excessive particular case never held even intimated eighth amendment serves check power jury award damages civil case rather concerns applying eighth amendment criminal process direct actions initiated government inflict punishment awards punitive damages implicate concerns therefore hold basis history purpose eighth amendment excessive fines clause apply awards punitive damages cases private parties weighty questions constitutional law arise unlikely source business burlington petitioner industries vermont subsidiary petitioner industries collectively bfi operates nationwide commercial disposal business bfi entered burlington area market began offer collection services bfi sole provider services burlington area year respondent joseph kelley since bfi local district manager went business starting respondent kelco disposal inc within year kelco obtained nearly burlington market kelco market share risen bfi reacted attempting drive kelco business first offering buy kelco cutting prices new business approximately six months orders given burlington bfi office regional vice president clear put kelley business whatever takes squish like bug app bfi burlington salesman also instructed put kelco business told meant give stuff away give away ibid first four months bfi predatory campaign kelco revenues dropped kelco attorney wrote bfi legal department asserting bfi pricing strategy illegal threatened initiate proceedings continued bfi respond continued policy several months bfi market share remained stable kelco captured market year bfi sold third party left burlington market kelco kelley brought action district district vermont alleging violation sherman act attempts monopolize burlington market also claimed bfi interfered kelco contractual relations violation vermont tort law kelley claims severed kelco kelco antitrust tort claims tried jury trial bfi found liable counts trial damages followed kelco submitted evidence regarding revenues profits lost result bfi predatory prices kelco attorney urged jury return award punitive damages asking jurors deliver message houston bfi headquarters kelco also stressed bfi total revenues billion previous year noting figure broke million week bfi urged punitive damages appropriate made argument amount district instructed jury award punitive damages claims found clear convincing evidence bfi conduct revealed actual malice outrageous conduct constituted willful wanton reckless disregard plaintiff rights also told jury determining amount punitive damages take account character defendants financial standing nature acts ibid bfi raised relevant objection charge punitive damages jury returned verdict compensatory damages counts million punitive damages bfi moved judgment notwithstanding verdict new trial remittitur district denied motions awarded kelco treble damages attorney fees costs antitrust claim alternative compensatory punitive damages claim bfi appealed appeals second circuit affirmed judgment liability damages issue punitive damages noted evidence showed bfi wilfully deliberately attempted drive kelco market found indication jury prejudice bias addressing eighth amendment issue noted even amendment applicable nominally civil case damages disproportionate cruel unusual constitutionally excessive upheld award ibid importance granted certiorari punitive damages issue ii eighth amendment reads excessive bail shall required excessive fines imposed cruel unusual punishments inflicted although never considered application excessive fines clause interpreted amendment entirety way suggests clause apply award punitive damages given amendment addressed bail fines punishments cases long understood apply primarily perhaps exclusively criminal prosecutions punishments see ex parte watkins pet eighth amendment addressed courts exercising criminal jurisdiction fong yue ting amendment inapplicable deportation deportation punishment crime ingraham wright bail fines punishment traditionally associated criminal process subjecting three parallel limitations text amendment suggests intention limit power entrusted function government decide instant case however need go far hold excessive fines clause applies criminal cases whatever outer confines clause reach may decide constrain award money damages civil suit government neither prosecuted action right receive share damages awarded hold otherwise believe ignore purposes concerns amendment illuminated history eighth amendment received little debate first congress see weems excessive fines clause received even less attention surprising least eight original ratified constitution equivalent excessive fines clause respective declarations rights state constitutions matter likely source controversy extensive discussion although prohibition excessive fines mentioned part complaint amendment unnecessary imprecise see congress discuss meant term fines whether prohibition application civil context absence direct evidence congress intended meaning think significant time drafting ratification amendment word fine understood mean payment sovereign punishment offense fines assessed criminal rather private civil actions inferential evidence language support conclusion excessive fines clause inapplicable award punitive damages undisputed purpose history amendment generally excessive fines clause specifically confirm reading eighth amendment clearly adopted particular intent placing limits powers new government time ratification original constitution criticized massachusetts virginia conventions failure provide protection persons convicted crimes criticism provided impetus inclusion eighth amendment bill rights ingraham wright omitted see generally barron mayor city council baltimore pet almost every convention constitution adopted amendments guard abuse power recommended weems predominant political impulse proponents bill rights distrust power insisted constitutional limitations abuse simply put primary focus eighth amendment potential governmental abuse prosecutorial power concern extent purposes civil damages moreover specific persuasive support reading excessive fines clause comes pedigree clause noted cases clear eighth amendment based directly art virginia declaration rights adopted verbatim language english bill rights solem helm section english bill rights like eighth amendment excessive bail required excessive fines imposed cruel unusual punishments inflicted wm mary ch stat large recounted ingraham english version adopted accession william mary intended curb excesses english judges reign james ii reigns stuarts king judges imposed heavy fines king enemies much star chamber done abolition schwoerer declaration rights use fines became even excessive partisan opponents king forced remain prison pay huge monetary penalties assessed ibid group drew bill rights firsthand experience several subjected heavy fines king bench framers bill rights aware took account abuses led bill rights history coupled fact accepted english definition fine appears identical use colonial america time bill rights seems us clear support reading excessive fines clause limiting ability sovereign use prosecutorial power including power collect fines improper ends providing even clearer support view english case law immediately prior enactment english bill rights stressed difference civil damages criminal fines see lord townsend hughes mod eng short nothing english history suggests excessive fines clause bill rights direct ancestor eighth amendment intended apply damages awarded disputes private parties instead history eighth amendment convinces us excessive fines clause intended limit fines directly imposed payable government petitioners however argue excessive fines clause derives limitations english law monetary penalties exacted private civil cases punish deter misconduct brief petitioners recognize nothing history recounted thus far espouses view find support turn clock hundreds years back english history prior magna carta particular use abuse amercements according petitioners amercements essentially civil damages limits magna carta placed use amercements forerunners bill rights prohibition excessive fines view english bill rights eighth amendment must understood reaching beyond criminal context magna carta punitive damages suggest must within scope excessive fines clause analog amercements argument somewhat intriguing hesitate place great emphasis particulars english practice particularly interpretation urged adopt appears conflict lessons recent history even understanding use amercements development actions damages common law convince us petitioners view relevant history support result seek amercements payments crown required individuals king mercy act offensive crown acts ranged today consider minor criminal offenses breach king peace force arms civil wrongs king infringing final concord made king see pollock maitland history english law ed pollock maitland see also solem helm amercement common criminal sanction england mckechnie magna carta ed mckechnie discussing amercements step development criminal law amercements royal penalty used plaintiffs failed follow complex rules pleading defendants today liable tort also entire township failed live obligations sheriff neglected duties use amercements widespread one commentary said men england expect amerced least year see pollock maitland response frequent occasionally abusive use amercements king magna carta included several provisions placing limits circumstances person amerced amount amercement barons forced john agree magna carta sought reduce arbitrary royal power particular limit king use amercements source royal revenue weapon enemies crown amercements clause magna carta limited abuses four ways requiring one amerced genuine harm crown requiring amount amercement proportioned wrong requiring amercement large deprive livelihood requiring amount amercement fixed one peers sworn amerce proportionate amount petitioners commentators find history basis concluding excessive fines clause operates limit ability civil jury award punitive damages agree whatever uncertainties surround use amercements prior magna carta compact signed runnymede aimed putting limits power king tyrannical extortions name amercements john oppressed people english constitutional history plucknett ed whether power exercised purposes oppressing political opponents raising revenue unfair ways improper use see holdsworth history english law ed concerns clearly inapposite case private party receives exemplary damages another party government share recovery cf halper double jeopardy clause petitioners ultimately rely little fact distinction civil criminal law cloudy perhaps nonexistent time magna carta overlap civil criminal procedure time nothing support petitioners case indications english courts never understood amercements clauses relevant private damages kind either later time see lord townsend hughes eng magna carta amercements provisions apply criminal civil cases even common law developed point courts occasionally decrease damages award eliminate altogether action never predicated theory government somehow overstepped bounds rather perceived error one made jury determined reference rather constitutional standards whether based reasoning jury award excessive must based bias prejudice see wood gunston sty eng leith pope bl eng jury must misconstrued evidence see ash ash comb eng proper focus still behavior jury difficult understand magna carta english bill rights viewed lens magna carta compels us read eighth amendment excessive fines clause applying punitive damages documents never applied conclusion framers eighth amendment expressly intend apply damages awards made civil juries necessarily complete inquiry eighth amendment jurisprudence inflexible considering eighth amendment stated time works changes brings existence new conditions purposes therefore principle vital must capable wider application mischief gave birth particularly true constitutions weems aspect eighth amendment jurisprudence might force punitive damages strictly modern creation without solid grounding days practice awarding damages far excess actual compensation quantifiable injuries well recognized time framers produced eighth amendment awards double treble damages authorized statute date back century see statute gloucester edw ch stat large treble damages waste see also pollock maitland doctrine expressly recognized cases early despite recognition civil exemplary damages punitive nature eighth amendment expressly include within scope rather earlier noted text amendment points intent deal prosecutorial powers government furthermore even prepared extend scope excessive fines clause beyond context framers clearly intended apply persuaded respect cases punitive damages awards private civil cases far afield concerns animate eighth amendment think clear language excessive fines clause nature constitutional framework eighth amendment places limits steps government may take individual whether keeping prison imposing excessive monetary sanctions using cruel unusual punishments fact punitive damages imposed aegis courts serve advance governmental interests insufficient support step petitioners ask us take agree petitioners punitive damages advance interests punishment deterrence also among interests advanced criminal law fail see overlap requires us apply excessive fines clause case private parties government vermont taken positive step punish obviously criminal context used civil courts extract large payments forfeitures purpose raising revenue disabling individual shall ignore language excessive fines clause history theory based order apply punitive damages iii petitioners also ask us review punitive damages award determine whether excessive due process clause fourteenth amendment parties agree due process imposes limits jury awards punitive damages disputed jury award may upheld product bias passion reached proceedings lacking basic elements fundamental fairness petitioners make claim proceedings unfair jury biased blinded emotion prejudice instead seek due process protections addressed directly size damages award authority opinions view due process clause places outer limits size civil damages award made pursuant statutory scheme see louis williams never addressed precise question presented whether due process acts check undue jury discretion award punitive damages absence express statutory limit see bankers life casualty crenshaw concurring part concurring judgment inquiry must await another day petitioners failed raise due process argument either district appeals made specific mention petition certiorari shall consider effect award iv petitioners also ask us hold award punitive damages excessive matter federal common law rather directing us developed body federal law however merely repeat standards urged us adopt eighth amendment role review directly award excessiveness substitute judgment jury rather inquiry whether appeals erred finding district abuse discretion refusing grant petitioners motion federal rule civil procedure new trial remittitur applying proper deference district award punitive damages stand review district order involves questions state federal law diversity action lawsuit state law provides basis decision propriety award punitive damages conduct question factors jury may consider determining amount questions state law federal law however control issues involving proper review jury award federal district appeals see donovan penn shipping see also moore lucas grotheer moore federal practice ed reviewing award punitive damages role district determine whether jury verdict within confines set state law determine reference federal standards developed rule whether new trial remittitur ordered appeals review district determination standard although petitioners amici like us craft standard excessiveness relies notions proportionality punitive compensatory damages makes reference statutory penalties similar conduct matters state federal common law adopting rule along lines petitioners suggest require us ignore distinction issues obvious reasons decline invitation performing limited function federal appellate perceive federal standard compelling federal policy convinces us continue accord considerable deference district decision order new trial case district properly instructed jury vermont law see supra applied proper standard considering whether verdict returned excessive although opinion appeals clear us whether applied state federal law reviewing district order denying new trial remittitur convinced conclusion abuse discretion district consistent federal standards light broad range factors vermont law permits juries consider awarding punitive damages sum conclude neither federal common law excessive fines clause eighth amendment provides basis disturbing jury punitive damages award case accordingly judgment appeals affirmed ordered footnotes waste collection usually performed large industrial locations construction sites use large truck compactor container much larger typical dumpster ingraham like eighth amendment cases involved cruel unusual punishments clause therefore directly controlling excessive fines clause case insights meaning eighth amendment reached ingraham similar cases however highly instructive left open ingraham possibility cruel unusual punishments clause might find application civil cases see examples cited possibilities persons confined mental juvenile institutions provide much support petitioners argument excessive fines clause applicable civil award punitive damages event petitioners made argument specifically based cruel unusual punishments clause language carlson landon suggesting bail clause may implicated civil deportation proceedings held eighth amendment require bail allowed cases opinion case never addressed question whether eighth amendment applied civil cases held bail clause require congress provide bail case prohibits imposition excessive bail carlson provides petitioners little support another reason well bail nature implicated direct government restraint personal liberty criminal case civil deportation proceeding potential governmental abuse bail clause guards present instances way abuses excessive fines clause protects present jury assesses punitive damages basic mode inquiry applied considering scope excessive fines clause proper eighth amendment contexts look origins clause purposes directed framers applicability eighth amendment always turned original meaning demonstrated historical derivation ingraham emphasize however historical emphasis concerns question eighth amendment applied jurisprudence cruel unusual punishments clause indicates approach relied history extent considering scope amendment see trop dulles plurality opinion amendment must draw meaning evolving standards decency mark progress maturing society delaware georgia maryland massachusetts new hampshire north carolina pennsylvania virginia declaration rights constitution expressly prohibiting excessive fines see schwartz bill rights documentary history virginia pennsylvania delaware maryland north carolina georgia massachusetts new hampshire fine signifieth percuniarie punishment offence contempt committed king coke institutes second edition cunningham published defined fines offences amends pecuniary punishment recompense offence committed king laws lord manor cunningham new complete unpaginated see also tomlins bouvier law dictionary ed petitioners come forward evidence argument convinces us word fine used late century encompassed private civil damages kind indeed term damages also use time eighth amendment drafted ratified precise meaning limited civil context cunningham defined damages follows common law part jurors inquire bring action passeth plaintiff damages comprehend recompense plaintiff demandant hath suffered means wrong done defendant tenant cunningham supra see also tomlins bouvier dichotomy fines damages clear cases used word fine refer civil damages assessed statute partial dissent notes two cases decided years excessive fines clause adopted considered term fines include money recovered civil suit paid government see hanscomb russell mass gosselink campbell iowa cases however provide support petitioners argument eighth amendment applicable cases private parties partial dissent reliance bard post observe though shakespeare course knew law time foremost poet search rhyme particular examples see trial thomas pilkington others riot state tr trial sir samuel barnardiston state tr justice story view eighth amendment adopted admonition departments national government warn violent proceedings taken place england arbitrary reigns stuarts story commentaries constitution cooley ed definition fines damages discussed nn supra already taken hold definition damages see blount unpaginated see treatise laws customs realm england commonly called glanvill hall ed written introduction curia regis rolls publications selden society flower ed defendants amerced well justices hesitate extract amercements parties occasion arose wide variety conduct amercements assessed parties see beecher case eng ex select pleas crown publications selden society maitland ed selden society see pleas crown county gloucester xxxiii maitland ed pleas gloucester see generally selden society without discussing complex origins civil damages detail see pollock maitland selden society say confidently damages amercements time magna carta damages awards rare pollock maitland usual relief fixed monetary payment specific relief distinction amercements damages well known former payable crown legal action error ineptitude took place course latter represented loss incurred litigant unlawful act payable private litigant selden society overlap two might occur assize novel disseisin grant recovery land chattels might amerce defendant well see generally pollock maitland even action amerciable offense one crown every disseisin breach peace well improper possession another property along lines see selden society comparison amercements damages seldom remitted good reason king liked careful show mercy expense wronged subject shall amerced small fault manner fault great fault greatness thereof saving contenement merchant likewise saving merchandise villain shall likewise amerced saving wainage falls mercy none said amerciaments shall assessed oath honest lawful men vicinage earls barons shall amerced peers manner offence man church shall amerced quantity spiritual benefice quantity offence magna charta hen iii ch stat large confirmed edw ch see generally mckechnie smith constitutional legal history england although amercements large see mckechnie pollock maitland placed king mercy meant least theoretically man estate king hands within king power require forfeit see selden society mckechnie one called king service go mercy estate subject forfeiture amercements also resembled form taxation particularly used entire townships see pleas gloucester xxxiv according pollock maitland found person king mercy person obtained pledge payment whatever sum amerced go cases point person yet amerced end session good lawful men peers offender two seem enough sworn affeer amercements set upon offender fixed sum money pay sum amercement pollock maitland see also pleas gloucester xxxiv procedure indicates amercements assessed jury different considered case see massey excessive fines clause punitive damages lessons history vand rev note constitutionality punitive damages excessive fines clause eighth amendment rev example house lords placed certain limits types cases exemplary damages awarded lord devlin extensive discussion mentioned neither magna carta excessive fines clause bill rights suggest english constitutional common law placed restrictions award exemplary damages discussed rookes barnard fact lord devlin recognized suggested alterations departure traditional view find significant countries share english heritage followed decision rookes continue allow punitive exemplary damages awarded without substantial interference see uren john fairfax sons australia declining follow rookes bahner marwest hotel canada fogg mcknight new zealand weems justice mckenna continued writing constitutions ephemeral enactments designed meet passing occasions use words chief justice marshall designed approach immortality nearly human institutions approach future care provision events good bad tendencies prophecy made application constitution therefore contemplation may rule constitution indeed easy application deficient efficacy power general principles little value converted precedent impotent lifeless formulas rights declared words might lost reality among first cases make explicit reference exemplary damages huckle money wils eng refused set aside jury award plaintiff injury compensated upholding referred award exemplary damages noted law laid shall measure damages actions tort measure vague uncertain depending vast variety causes facts circumstances declined intermeddle damages determination must glaring case indeed outrageous damages tort mankind first blush must think induce grant new trial excessive damages eng another case decided year stated applicable principle particular clarity damages designed satisfaction injured person likewise punishment guilty deter proceeding future proof detestation jury action wilkes wood lofft eng english cases followed similar approach see roe hawkes lev eng grey grant wils eng benson frederick burr eng halper held double jeopardy clause fifth amendment places limits amounts federal government may recover civil action defendant already punished criminal process opinion halper implies punitive damages awarded government civil action may raise eighth amendment concerns case materially different one government exacting punishment civil action whereas damages awarded private party noted halper nothing opinion precludes private party filing civil suit seeking damages conduct previously subject criminal prosecution punishment protections double jeopardy clause triggered litigation private parties emphasis added left open question whether qui tam action private party brings suit name shares award damages implicate double jeopardy clause leave question open purposes eighth amendment excessive fines clause result reach today need answer several questions otherwise might necessarily antecedent finding eighth amendment excessive fines clause applicable award punitive damages briefed parties shall decide whether eighth amendment prohibition excessive fines applies several fourteenth amendment shall decide whether eighth amendment protects corporations well individuals petitioners claim due process question within clear intendment objection made throughout proceedings review proceedings district appeals shows petitioners primary claim courts punitive damages award violated vermont state law petitioners also argued award violated eighth amendment fail see claim award violates due process necessarily part arguments shall assume nonconstitutional argument also includes constitutional one shall stretch specific claims made eighth amendment cover might arise due process clause well although particular cases applied doctrine petitioners advance see braniff airways nebraska bd equalization assessment case respondent making arguments support judgment see revere massachusetts general hospital dandridge williams absence developed record issues relevant due process inquiry shall stretch clear intendment doctrine include case think due process question enlargement eighth amendment inquiry although due process analysis award punitive damages may track closely eighth amendment analysis suggested petitioners shall assume case shall attempt decide question absence record due process point developed district appeals law punitive damages vermont typical law american jurisdictions doctrine long standing far back vermont noted law exemplary damages long settled state nye merriam vermont jury may award punitive damages evidence supports finding defendant acted malice see appropriate technology palma malice wantonness shown act rogers bigelow punitive damages awards may set aside grossly manifestly excessive see glidden skinner vermont declined adopt rule proportionality compensatory punitive damages pezzano bonneau allow punitive damages stand award compensatory damages vacated allard ford motor credit plaintiff presented sufficient evidence malice evidence defendant pecuniary ability may considered order determine punishment lent huntoon quoting kidder bacon million punitive damages case apparently largest judgment history vermont substantial jury awards however state see coty ramsey associates punitive damages cert denied never held expressly seventh amendment allows appellate review district denial motion set aside award excessive although granted certiorari two cases order consider issue instances found unnecessary reach question decided case see neese southern even assuming appellate review power seventh amendment appeals justified reversing denial new trial particular facts case grunenthal long island light result reach today follow course particularly true federal courts operate strictures seventh amendment result reluctant stray far traditional standards take steps ultimately might interfere proper role jury justice brennan justice marshall joins concurring join opinion understanding leaves door open holding due process clause constrains imposition punitive damages civil cases brought private parties see ante several decisions indicate even statute sets range possible civil damages may awarded private litigant due process clause forbids damages awards grossly excessive oil texas severe oppressive wholly disproportioned offense obviously unreasonable louis williams see also southwestern telegraph telephone danaher missouri pacific humes think anything scrutiny awards made without benefit legislature deliberation guidance less indulgent consideration fall within statutory limits without statutory least standards determination large award punitive damages appropriate given case juries left largely making important potentially devastating decision indeed jury case sent jury room nothing following terse instruction determining amount punitive damages may take account character defendants financial standing nature acts app guidance like scarcely better guidance suggest instruction error indeed appears correct statement vermont law point rather instruction reveals deeper flaw fact punitive damages imposed juries guided little admonition think best touchstone due process protection individual arbitrary action government daniels williams quoting wolff mcdonnell one look longer harder award punitive damages based skeletal guidance one situated within range penalties responsible officials deliberated agreed since correctly concludes challenge based due process clause properly us however leave fuller discussion matters another day justice justice stevens joins concurring part dissenting part awards punitive damages skyrocketing recently decade ago largest award punitive damages affirmed appellate products liability case see owen punitive damages products liability litigation rev since awards times high sustained appeal see ford motor durrill tex app million ford motor stubblefield app million palmer robins million threat enormous awards detrimental effect research development new products manufacturers prescription drugs example decided better avoid uncertain liability introduce new pill vaccine market see brief pharmaceutical manufacturers association et al amici curiae similarly designers airplanes motor vehicles forced abandon new projects fear lawsuits often lead awards punitive damages see generally huber liability legal revolution consequences trend toward multimillion dollar awards punitive damages exemplified case vermont jury found industries bfi tried monopolize burlington waste disposal market interfered contractual relations kelco disposal kelco jury awarded kelco compensatory damages later trebled antitrust claim million punitive damages award punitive damages times actual damages suffered kelco far exceeds highest reported award punitive damages affirmed vermont cf coty ramsey associates punitive damages based compensatory damages cert denied holds today excessive fines clause eighth amendment places limits amount punitive damages awarded suit private parties result neither compelled history supported precedent therefore respectfully dissent part ii opinion however agree due process claims either procedural substantive properly presented case award punitive damages overturned matter federal common law therefore join parts iii iv opinion moreover share justice brennan view ante nothing opinion forecloses due process challenge awards punitive damages method imposed adhere comments bankers life casualty crenshaw opinion concurring part concurring judgment regarding vagueness procedural due process problems presented juries given unbridled discretion impose punitive damages considering merits bfi eighth amendment claim two preliminary questions must addressed first excessive fines clause apply due process clause fourteenth amendment second corporation bfi protected excessive fines clause award punitive damages bfi based vermont law see almost years ago held eighth amendment apply see vermont see also pervear commonwealth wall years applied eighth amendment ban cruel unusual punishments territory see wilkerson utah holding execution firing squad prohibited eighth amendment louisiana ex rel francis resweber assumed without deciding eighth amendment applied confusion created wilkerson francis eliminated robinson california albeit without discussion reversed state conviction offense narcotics addiction constituting cruel unusual punishment repugnant fourteenth amendment since robinson cruel unusual punishments clause regularly applied notably capital sentencing context addition assumed excessive bail clause eighth amendment applies see schilb kuebel see reason distinguish one clause eighth amendment another purposes incorporation hold excessive fines clause also applies words chief justice marshall corporation artificial invisible intangible existing contemplation law dartmouth college woodward wheat entitled purely personal guarantees whose historic function limited protection individuals first national bank boston bellotti thus corporation fifth amendment privilege wilson right privacy morton salt hand corporation first amendment right freedom speech virginia pharmacy bd virginia citizens consumer council property taken without compensation penn central transportation new york city corporation also protected unreasonable searches seizures marshall barlow plead former jeopardy bar prosecution martin linen supply furthermore corporation entitled due process helicopteros nacionales de colombia hall equal protection metropolitan life ins ward law whether particular constitutional guarantee applies corporations depends nature history purpose guarantee first national bank boston supra payment monetary penalties unlike ability remain silent something corporation entity reviewed fines monetary penalties imposed corporations fourteenth amendment time eighth amendment apply see oil texas see also louis williams corporation protected due process clause overbearing oppressive monetary sanctions also protected penalties excessive fines clause see whitney stores summerford supp sc entertaining eighth amendment challenge corporation fine violation sunday closing laws summarily aff ii language ingraham wright ex parte watkins pet suggests entire eighth amendment confined criminal prosecutions punishments correctly acknowledges ante language dispositive ingraham held cruel unusual punishments clause eighth amendment apply disciplinary corporal punishment public school excessive fines clause issue ingraham statement text eighth amendment suggests intention limit power entrusted function government controlling similar statement ex parte watkins eighth amendment addressed courts exercising criminal jurisdiction dictum held appellate jurisdiction entertain challenge way writ habeas corpus criminal fines imposed upon defendant appellate jurisdiction revise sentences inferior courts criminal cases even excess fine apparent record reverse sentence another reason rely guided sweeping statements ingraham ex parte watkins statements inconsistent application excessive bail clause eighth amendment civil proceedings carlson landon immigration deportation see salerno recognizing carlson civil case sum none precedents foreclose application excessive fines clause punitive damages iii history excessive fines clause thoroughly canvassed several recent articles conclude clause applicable punitive damages see boston punitive damages eighth amendment application excessive fines clause cooley rev boston massey excessive fines clause punitive damages lessons history vand rev massey jeffries comment constitutionality punitive damages rev jeffries note constitutionality punitive damages excessive fines clause eighth amendment rev note view chronological account clause antecedents demonstrates clause derives limitations english law monetary penalties exacted civil criminal cases punish deter misconduct history aside cases leave doubt punitive damages serve purposes punishment deterrence criminal law excessive punitive damages present precisely evil exorbitant monetary penalties clause designed prevent story excessive fines clause begins early days english justice crime tort clearly distinct jeffries saxon legal system england victim wrong rather seek vengeance retaliation bloodfeud accept financial compensation injury wrongdoer wrongdoer also made pay additional sum ground every evil deed inflicts wrong society general mckechnie magna carta mckechnie point norman conquest method settling disputes gave way system individuals engaged conduct offensive crown placed king mercy satisfy monetary claims see generally pollock maitland history english law ed pollock maitland order receive clemency individuals required pay amercement crown representative feudal lord tumey ohio massey cf stringham magna carta fountainhead freedom share amercement went victim victim family amercement originated time little distinction criminal law tort law neither strictly civil criminal sanction note blackstone however clearly thought amercements civil punishments see blackstone commentaries amercements misbehaviour matters civil right one commentator noted amercement assessed commonly civil sanction wrongfully bringing defending civil lawsuit massey list conduct meriting amercement voluminous trespass improper false pleading default failure appear economic wrongs torts crimes see generally beecher case eng ex amount amercement set arbitrarily according extent king officers chose relax forfeiture offender goods jeffries see also boston frequency sometimes abusive nature amercements chapter magna carta hen iii ch prohibited amercements disproportionate offense deprive wrongdoer means livelihood shall amerced small fault manner fault great fault greatness thereof saving contenement merchant likewise saving merchandise villain shall likewise amerced saving wainage fall mercy none said amerciaments shall assessed oath honest lawful men vicinage earls barons shall amerced peers manner offence man church shall amerced quantity spiritual benefice quantity offence numbers omitted fines amercements similar functions fines originated century voluntary sums paid crown avoid indefinite prison sentence crime avoid royal displeasure pollock maitland massey fine operated substitute imprisonment actual power impose fine sentence wrongdoer prison avoid imprisonment wrongdoer make fine voluntarily contracting crown pay money thereby ending matter crown gradually eliminated voluntary nature fine imposing indefinite sentences upon wrongdoers effectively forced pay fine fine longer voluntary became equivalent amercement note see also boston although theory fines voluntary amercements purpose two penalties equivalent surprising practice became difficult distinguish two century fines lost original character bargain replaced amercements preferred penal sanction word fine took modern meaning word amercement dropped ordinary usage mckechnie nomenclature still caused confusion see griesley case eng fine refusing serve constable analyzed amercement william shakespeare astute observer english law politics distinguish fines amercements plays wrote late century romeo juliet published prince escalus uses words amerce fine interchangeably warning montagues capulets shed blood streets verona interest hate proceeding blood rude brawls doth lie amerce strong fine shall repent loss mine act iii scene lines according blackstone english bill rights declaratory old constitutional law blackstone commentaries see also schwoerer excessive fines provision article reaffirmed ancient law course prohibition excessive monetary penalties predating article contained magna carta since incorporated earlier prohibition excessive amercements arise civil settings well forms punishment article limitation excessive fines limited strictly criminal cases extends monetary sanctions imposed criminal civil contexts note word amercement dropped ordinary usage late century appears word fine article simply shorthand monetary penalties whether imposed judge jury civil criminal proceedings massey indeed three months adoption english bill rights house lords reversed fine referring magna carta article see earl devonshire case state tr ruling fine striking another excessive exorbitant magna charta common right subject law land argues chapter magna carta article english bill rights concerned limiting governmental abuses power amercements fines paid crown assumes governmental abuses take place sovereign exacts penalty assumption however simply recalls historical accident prior century monetary sanctions filled coffers king barons early first statute westminster double treble damages allowed statute see ante however prevalence amercement diminished cases began report award punitive damages common law entitlement massey one first reported cases allowing punitive damages wilkes wood lofft eng jury power give damages injury received damages designed satisfaction injured person likewise punishment guilty deter proceeding future proof detestation jury action link gradual disappearance amercement emergence punitive damages provides strong historical support applying excessive fines clause awards punitive damages see boston case lord townsend hughes mod eng cited ante inconsistent understanding history time hughes decided damages understood compensation injury see blount blount unpaginated defining damages recompense plaintiff demandant hath suffered means wrong done defendant tenant emphasis added hughes involved action slander jury told award damages harm plaintiff sustained damages awarded entirely compensatory contain punitive element whatsoever thus hughes stand proposition magna carta inapplicable punitive damages awarded civil cases reasons neither commentaries cited differentiating damages amercements see ante damages referred commentaries compensatory punitive nature see introduction curia regis rolls publications selden society flower ed damages represented loss incurred litigant unlawful act emphasis added amercements fines meant compensate injured plaintiff rather punish wrongdoer express society displeasure improper act compensatory damages even saxon england limited magna carta meant ensure monetary penalties assessed addition compensatory sums measure proportionality also points rookes barnard lord devlin extensive discussion exemplary damages decision limit certain cases mention either magna carta excessive fines clause english bill rights ante although small point think mistaken place reliance lack citation magna carta english bill rights rookes english courts today need cite two documents principles set forth ingrained part common law see holt magna carta possible indeed justifiable lawyer compose general survey freedom individual england without referring magna carta indeed english courts cited magna carta english bill rights cases involving excessiveness criminal fines see queen asif cr app upholding fine fraudulent evasion taxes queen farenden cr app finding fine first offense careless driving heavy reducing moreover lord devlin noted rookes punitive damages used liberty awards juries made past seem amount greater punishment likely incurred conduct criminal allow respect traditionally paid assessment damages jury prevent seeing weapon used without restraint thus suggested limits might placed punitive damages may even house lords may find necessary place arbitrary limit awards damages made way punishment exhortations moderate may enough little debate eighth amendment first congress discussion excessive fines clause consideration eighth amendment immediately followed consideration fifth amendment deciding confine benefits clause fifth amendment criminal proceedings framers turned attention eighth amendment proposals limit amendment criminal proceedings discussion smith south carolina livermore new hampshire thought cruel unusual punishments clause indefinite see granucci weems exactly significance silence framers constitutional interpretation open debate compare tribe constitutional choices powell rules originalists rev necessary address issue eighth amendment based directly article virginia declaration rights turn adopted verbatim language english bill rights doubt declaration rights guaranteed least liberties privileges englishmen solem helm see also howard road runnymede magna carta constitutionalism america howard anything apparent history set forth monetary penalty england excessive strong link amercements assessed civil cases fines cf solem supra amercement similar fine short considerable historical support application excessive fines clause punitive damages however thinks otherwise emphasizes time eighth amendment enacted word fine understood mean payment sovereign punishment offense ante view meaning word much ambiguous willing concede defining word fine dictionaries mention money paid see sheridan dictionary english language ed unpaginated mulct pecuniary punishment johnson dictionary english language ed unpaginated mulct pecuniary punishment penalty money paid exemption liberty effect dictionaries see richardson new dictionary english language thing sum money paid end make end termination conclusion suit prosecution word fine broader meaning century also illustrated language massachusetts body liberties provision granted courts authority impose civil plaintiff instituted improper suit proportionable fine use defendant accused person schwartz bill rights documentary history emphasis added noteworthy fine payable private party governmental entity boston massachusetts general ruled body liberties based directly chapter magna carta howard also finds significant centuries fines assessed criminal rather private civil actions ante view recitation history complete noted massachusetts body liberties required fines payable private litigants civil cases proportional furthermore sources unequivocally linked fines criminal proceedings see blount fine sometimes amends pecuniary punishment recompense upon offence committed king laws lord mannor emphasis added american courts century view fines exclusively criminal massachusetts judicial held word fine statute meant forfeitures penalties recoverable civil actions well pecuniary punishments inflicted sentence hanscomb russell mass explained word fine meanings besides pecuniary penalties inflicted sentence exercise criminal jurisdiction appears dictionaries language defined pecuniary punishment also forfeiture penalty etc iowa following say fines terms fine forfeiture penalty often used loosely even confusedly fine pecuniary penalty commonly perhaps always collected suit form forfeiture penalty one loses rights interest property gosselink campbell iowa emphasis added hence around time framing enactment eighth amendment courts commentators believed word fine encompassed civil penalties view million award punitive damages imposed bfi constitutes fine subject limitations eighth amendment current usage word fine comprehends forfeiture penalty recoverable civil action see black law dictionary ed webster third new international dictionary understanding supported history set forth buttressed precedents punitive damages private fines levied civil juries electrical workers foust emphasis added awarded compensate injury rather aims criminal law punish reprehensible conduct deter future occurrence bankers life casualty concurring part concurring judgment see also restatement second torts role therefore runs counter normal reparative function tort contract remedies redden punitive damages cases abound recognition penal nature punitive damages see tull memphis community school district stachura silkwood blackmun dissenting smith wade rehnquist dissenting newport fact concerts gertz robert welch rosenbloom metromedia marshall dissenting lake shore prentice plethora case law nature punitive damages seems sufficient find excessive fines clause applicable award case however ever even support applicability clause determining whether sanction penal generally looked several factors whether involves affirmative disability whether historically regarded punishment whether comes play finding scienter whether operation promote retribution deterrence whether behavior applies already crime whether alternative purpose whether excessive relation alternative purpose assigned kennedy agree commentators found easy conclude punitive damages penal factors see grass penal dimensions punitive damages hastings character sanction imposed punishment changed mode inflicted whether civil action criminal prosecution chouteau wrote recently civil sanction fairly said solely serve remedial purpose rather explained also serving either retributive deterrent purposes punishment halper emphasis added order evade teachings cases like choteau halper determines excessive fines clause becomes relevant governmental entity seeking reap benefits monetary sanction ante disagree formalistic analysis governmental entity abuse power allowing civil juries impose ruinous punitive damages way furthering purposes criminal law cf lugar edmondson oil also note relying heavily distinction governmental involvement purely private suits suggests despite claim ante leaves question open excessive fines clause place limits awards punitive damages recovered governmental entity see stat award punitive damages payable state far know applicability provision constitution never depended vagaries state federal law missouri pacific humes stressed constitutional insignificance monetary sanction administered recovered humes involved state statute providing double damages individual suffered harm due railroad failure maintain fences cattle guards holding double damages provision violate fourteenth amendment said additional damages way punishment valid objection sufferer instead state receives power state impose fines penalties violation statutory requirements coeval government mode shall enforced whether suit private party suit public disposition shall made amounts collected merely matters legislative discretion iv remaining question whether award million case excessive within meaning eighth amendment using economic analysis amici support bfi argue wealth defendant constitutional matter taken account setting amount award punitive damages see brief navistar international transportation amicus curiae seems argument fails excessive fines clause substantive ceiling amount monetary sanction economic primer factors best goals punishment deterrence fourteenth amendment enact herbert spencer social statics see lochner new york holmes dissenting eighth amendment incorporate views law economics school constitution require subscribe particular economic theory cts dynamics america moreover historical matter argument weak indeed first magna carta required amercement proportionate destroy person livelihood second blackstone remarked quantum particular pecuniary fines neither ascertained invariable law value money changes thousand causes events ruin one man fortune may matter indifference another blackstone commentaries determining whether particular award punitive damages excessive easy task proportionality framework adopted cruel unusual punishments clause however offers broad guidelines see solem cf busher applying solem factors civil forfeiture rico adapt solem framework punitive damages following manner first reviewing must accord substantial deference legislative judgments concerning appropriate sanctions conduct issue second examine gravity defendant conduct harshness award punitive damages third punitive damages penal nature compare civil criminal penalties imposed jurisdiction different types conduct civil criminal penalties imposed different jurisdictions similar conduct identifying relevant civil penalties consider amount awards punitive damages also statutory civil sanctions identifying relevant criminal penalties consider possible monetary sanctions also possible prison term appeals think excessive fines clause applied awards punitive damages therefore conduct sort proportionality analysis remand case appeals first instance apply solem framework set forth determine whether award million imposed bfi violates excessive fines clause