exxon shipping co et al baker et argued february decided june petitioners collectively exxon supertanker grounded reef alaska spilling millions gallons crude oil prince william sound accident occurred tanker captain joseph hazelwood history alcohol abuse whose blood still high alcohol level hours spill inexplicably exited bridge leaving tricky course correction unlicensed subordinates exxon spent billion cleanup efforts pleaded guilty criminal violations occasioning fines settled civil action alaska least million paid another million voluntary payments private parties civil cases consolidated one brought exxon hazelwood others recover economic losses suffered respondents hereinafter baker depend prince william sound livelihoods phase trial jury found exxon hazelwood reckless thus potentially liable punitive damages instructions providing corporation responsible reckless acts employees acting managerial capacity scope employment phase ii jury awarded million compensatory damages plaintiffs others settled compensatory claims million phase iii jury awarded punitive damages hazelwood billion exxon ninth circuit upheld phase jury instruction corporate liability ultimately remitted punitive damages award exxon billion held equally divided whether maritime law allows corporate liability punitive damages based acts managerial agents leaves ninth circuit opinion undisturbed respect course disposition precedential derivative liability question see neil biggers pp clean water act water pollution penalties preempt awards maritime spill cases section protects navigable waters adjoining shorelines natural resources subject saving clause reserving obligations law damages privately owned property resulting oil discharge exxon admission cwa displace compensatory remedies consequences water pollution even economic harms leaves company untenable claim cwa somehow preempts punitive damages compensatory damages economic loss nothing statute points result rejected similar attempts sever remedies causes action see silkwood clear indication congressional intent occupy entire field pollution remedies likely punitive damages private harms frustrating effect cwa remedial scheme pp punitive damages award exxon excessive matter maritime common law circumstances case award limited amount equal compensatory damages pp although legal codes ancient times middle ages called multiple damages certain especially harmful acts modern punitive damages roots english law became widely accepted american courts century see day woodworth pp prevailing american rule limits punitive damages cases enormity day woodworth defendant conduct outrageous owing gross negligence willful wanton reckless indifference others rights even deplorable behavior consensus today punitive damages aimed retribution deterring harmful conduct pp state regulation punitive damages varies award rarely others permit authorized statute many imposed statutory limits punitive awards form absolute monetary caps maximum ratio punitive compensatory damages frequently combination two pp american punitive damages come criticism recent decades recent studies tend undercut much although studies show dollar amounts awards growing time even real terms accounts show median ratio punitive compensatory awards remains less data show marked increase percentage cases punitive awards real problem stark unpredictability punitive awards courts concerned fairness consistency available data suggest spread high low individual awards unacceptable spread state civil trials great outlier cases subject defendants punitive damages dwarf corresponding compensatories distribution awards narrower still remarkable ranges might acceptable resulted efforts reach generally accepted optimal level penalty deterrence cases involving wide range circumstances anecdotal evidence suggests case see gore supra pp response outlier punitive damages awards thus far confined claims awards violated due process see state farm mut automobile ins campbell contrast today enquiry arises federal maritime jurisdiction requires review jury award level federal common law precedes obviate application constitutional standard context unpredictability high punitive awards tension punitive function implication unfairness eccentrically high punitive verdict carries penalty reasonably predictable severity even holmes bad man look ahead ability know stakes choosing one course action another penalty scheme threaten defendants fair probability suffering like degree like damage cf koon pp considers three approaches one verbal two quantitative arrive standard assessing maritime punitive damages pp skeptical verbal formulations best insurance unpredictable outlier punitive awards light experience attempts produce consistency analogous business criminal sentencing pp ii thus looks quantified limits option setting punitive cap however rejected standard tort contract injury making difficult settle upon particular dollar figure appropriate across board judicially selected dollar cap carry serious drawback issue might return docket need revisit figure selected pp iii promising alternative peg punitive awards compensatory damages using ratio maximum multiple model many analogous federal statutes allowing multiple damages question ratio appropriate acceptable standard found studies showing median ratio punitive compensatory awards studies reflect judgments juries judges thousands cases punitive awards appropriate circumstances reflecting least blameworthy conduct malice avarice recklessness gross negligence data question put median ratio entire gamut less meaning compensatory award exceeds punitive award cases system awards median roughly express jurors sense reasonable penalties cases like one earmarks exceptional blameworthiness accordingly finds ratio fair upper limit maritime cases pp iv applying standard present case takes granted district calculation total relevant compensatory damages million ratio thus yields maximum punitive damages amount vacated remanded souter delivered opinion roberts scalia kennedy thomas joined stevens ginsburg breyer joined parts ii iii scalia filed concurring opinion thomas joined stevens ginsburg breyer filed opinions concurring part dissenting part alito took part consideration decision case exxon shipping company et petitioners grant baker et al writ certiorari appeals ninth circuit june justice souter delivered opinion three questions maritime law us whether shipowner may liable punitive damages without acquiescence actions causing harm whether punitive damages barred implicitly federal statutory law making provision whether award billion case greater maritime law allow circumstances equally divided owner derivative liability hold federal statutory law bar punitive award top damages economic loss award limited amount equal compensatory damages march supertanker exxon valdez grounded bligh reef alaskan coast fracturing hull spilling millions gallons crude oil prince william sound owner petitioner exxon shipping seariver maritime owner petitioner exxon mobil collectively exxon settled state federal claims environmental damage payments exceeding billion action respondent baker others including commercial fishermen native alaskans brought economic losses individuals dependent prince william sound livelihoods tanker feet long used exxon carry crude oil end pipeline valdez alaska lower night spill carrying million gallons crude oil million barrels captain one joseph hazelwood completed alcohol treatment program employed exxon superiors knew dropped prescribed program stopped going alcoholics anonymous meetings according district evidence presented jury hazelwood released residential treatment drank bars parking lots apartments airports airplanes restaurants hotels various ports aboard exxon tankers exxon valdez order alaska app pet cert hereinafter order jury also heard contested testimony hazelwood drank exxon officials members exxon management knew relapse see ibid although exxon clear policy prohibiting employees serving onboard within four hours consuming alcohol see exxon valdez exxon presented evidence monitored hazelwood return duty considered giving shoreside assignment see order supra witnesses testified valdez left port night disaster hazelwood downed least five double vodkas waterfront bars valdez intake ounces alcohol enough passed ship sailed march guided pilot first leg valdez narrows hazelwood took active control owing poor conditions outbound shipping lane radioed coast guard permission move east across inbound lane less icy path conditions standard move last outbound tanker also taken coast guard cleared valdez cross inbound lane tanker accordingly steered east toward clearer waters move put path underwater reef bligh island thus requiring turn back west shipping lane around busby light north reef two minutes required turn however hazelwood left bridge went cabin order said paperwork decision inexplicable expert testimony even presence strictly necessary captains simply quit bridge maneuvers like paperwork justified fact evidence hazelwood presence required two officers bridge times departure left one person entire ship licensed navigate part prince william sound make matters worse going hazelwood put tanker autopilot speeding making turn trickier mistake harder correct hazelwood left instructed remaining officer third mate joseph cousins move tanker back shipping lane came abeam busby light cousins unlicensed navigate waters left alone helmsman robert kagan nonofficer reasons remain mystery failed make turn busby light later emergency maneuver attempted cousins came late tanker ran aground bligh reef tearing hull open spilling million gallons crude oil prince william sound hazelwood returned bridge reported grounding coast guard tried failed rock valdez reef maneuver spilled oil caused ship coast guard nearly immediate response included blood test hazelwood validity exxon disputes showing level eleven hours spill supp app experts testified much alcohol bloodstream long accident hazelwood time spill must level around order supra three times legal limit driving aftermath disaster exxon spent around billion cleanup efforts charged company criminal violations clean water act refuse act migratory bird treaty act ports waterways safety act dangerous cargo act exxon pleaded guilty violations clean water act refuse act migratory bird treaty act agreed pay million fine later reduced million plus restitution million civil action state alaska environmental harms ended consent decree exxon pay least million toward restoring natural resources paid another million voluntary settlements fishermen property owners private parties remaining civil cases consolidated one exxon hazelwood others district district alaska divided plaintiffs seeking compensatory damages three classes commercial fishermen native alaskans landowners exxon behest also certified mandatory class plaintiffs seeking punitive damages whose number topped respondents refer baker convenience members class purposes case exxon stipulated negligence valdez disaster ensuing liability compensatory damages designed trial accordingly phase considered exxon hazelwood recklessness thus potential punitive liability phase ii set compensatory damages commercial fishermen native alaksans phase iii determined amount punitive damages hazelwood exxon liable contemplated phase iv setting compensation still plaintiffs obviated settlement phase jury heard extensive testimony hazelwood alcoholism conduct night spill well conflicting testimony exxon officials knowledge hazelwood backslide close phase instructed jury part corporation responsible reckless acts employees employed managerial capacity acting scope employment reckless act omission managerial officer employee corporation course scope performance duties held law reckless act omission corporation app pet cert went employee corporation employed managerial capacity employee supervises employees responsibility authority particular aspect corporation business ibid exxon dispute hazelwood managerial employee definition see app jury found hazelwood exxon reckless thus potentially liable punitive damages app phase ii jury awarded million compensatory damages commercial fishermen deducted released claims settlements payments balance outstanding meanwhile native alaskan class settled compensatory claims million opted settlement ultimately settled total around million phase iii jury heard exxon management acts omissions arguably relevant spill see app close evidence instructed jurors purposes punitive damages emphasizing designed provide compensatory relief punish deter defendants see app brief opposition charged jury consider reprehensibility defendants conduct financial condition magnitude harm mitigating facts jury awarded punitive damages hazelwood billion exxon appeal appeals ninth circuit upheld phase jury instruction corporate liability acts managerial agents circuit precedent see exxon valdez citing protectus alpha nav north pacific grain growers respect size punitive damages award however circuit remanded twice adjustments light due process cases ultimately remitting award billion see per curiam granted certiorari consider whether maritime law allows corporate liability punitive damages basis acts managerial agents whether clean water act cwa stat et seq ed supp forecloses award punitive damages maritime spill cases whether punitive damages awarded exxon case excessive matter maritime common law vacate remand ii first question exxon says error instruct jury corporation responsible reckless acts employees managerial capacity acting scope employment app pet cert courts appeals split company relies primarily two cases amiable nancy wheat lake shore michigan southern prentice argue precedents clear punitive damages available shipowner shipmaster recklessness former suit admiralty owners scourge privateer whose officers crew boarded plundered neutral ship amiable nancy upholding award compensatory damages justice story observed suit original might proper visit upon shape exemplary damages proper punishment belongs lawless misconduct considered suit owners privateer upon law motives policy devolved responsibility conduct officers crew employed yet nature service scarcely ever able secure adequate indemnity cases loss innocent demerit transaction neither directed countenanced participated slightest degree circumstances opinion bound repair real injuries personal wrongs sustained libellants bound extent vindictive damages amiable nancy supra emphasis original exxon takes statement rule barring punitive liability shipowners actions underlings directed countenanced participated owners exxon claims confirmed rule lake shore supra railway case relied amiable nancy announce matter tompkins general common law hough principal liable make compensation intentional torts agent liable punished exemplary damages intent participate maritime law remains federal common law never revisited issue exxon argues lake shore endures sound evidence maritime law even rule amiable nancy lake shore control exxon urges fall back variant adopted context title vii civil rights act kolstad american dental employers subject punitive damages discriminatory conduct managerial employees show maintained enforced antidiscrimination policies baker supports ninth circuit upholding instruction authority protectus alpha nav followed restatement rule recognizing corporate liability punitive damages reckless acts managerial employees see restatement second torts hereinafter restatement baker says amiable nancy offers nothing dictum punitive damages issue lake shore merely rejected company liability acts railroad conductor saying nothing liability agents higher ladder like ship captains also makes broader points opinion criticized failing reflect majority rule time mention conflict respondeat superior rule overwhelming share jurisdictions today baker argues maritime rule conform modern common law majority allow punitive damages conduct employee others follow restatement imposing liability managerial agents equally divided question judges divided reversal order made durant essex wall therefore leave ninth circuit opinion undisturbed respect though go without saying disposition precedential derivative liability question see neil biggers ohio ex rel eaton price opinion brennan iii exxon next says whatever availability maritime punitive damages common law cwa preempts baker responds procedural merits arguments although dispose issue procedure short foray history worthwhile cautionary tale pretrial stage district controlled flood motions order staying purpose except discovery ultimately adopted plan allowing receipt seven specific summary judgment motions already scheduled requiring party additional motions obtain leave one motions scheduled sought summary judgment exxon ground pipeline authorization act stat displaced maritime common law foreclosed availability punitive damages district denied motion jury returned phase iii verdict september parties stipulated federal rules civil procedure motions filed september ordered app exxon filed including several seeking new trial judgment matter law one ground another going punitive damages award denied along rest october almost months stipulated motions deadline exxon moved district suspend motions stay app brief opposition allow file motion renewed motion judgment punitive damages claims rules extent may applicable pursuant rules app brief opposition exxon accompanying memorandum asserted two recent cases glynn roy al boat management guevara maritime overseas suggested rule maritime punitive damages displaced federal statutes including cwa november district summarily denied exxon request file motion app brief opposition january following settlement phase iv compensatory claims entered final judgment exxon renewed cwa preemption argument ninth circuit appeals recognized exxon raised cwa argument first time months phase iii verdict decided claim treated waived exxon consistently argued statutory preemption throughout litigation question massive significance given ambiguous circumstances case merits circuit held cwa preempt maritime common law punitive damages although agree ninth circuit conclusion reasons reaching hold first reason thought cwa issue fact waived exxon alleged statutory grounds preemption outset trial enough true nce federal claim properly presented party make argument support claim parties limited precise arguments made yee escondido principle stops well short legitimizing exxon untimely motion statutory preemption sufficient claim give exxon license rely newly cited statutes anytime wished litigant add new constitutional claims went along simply consistently argued challenged regulation unconstitutional see rejecting substantive due process claim takings petitioners failed preserve industries kelco disposal rejecting due process claim petitioners said motion still addressed circuit discretion massive significance question ambiguous circumstances case said relevant general rule course federal appellate consider issue passed upon singleton wulff deviate rule matter left primarily discretion courts appeals exercised facts individual cases previously stopped short stating general principle contain appellate courts discretion see exercise restraint merits agree ninth circuit exxon cwa claim fail two ways construe exxon argument cwa penalties water pollution see ed supp preempt common law remedies issue company saying tort action predicated oil spill preempted unless expressly preserves section protects navigable waters adjoining shorelines natural resources subject saving clause reserving obligations provision law damages publicly owned privately owned property resulting discharge oil exxon arguing saving clause makes mention preserving punitive damages economic loss preempted course number categories damages awards exxon claim preempted exxon correct preemption provisions compensatory damages thwarting economic activity matter compensatory damages physical personal injury oil spills water pollution find hard conclude statute expressly geared protecting water shorelines natural resources intended eliminate sub silentio oil companies common law duties refrain injuring bodies livelihoods private individuals perhaps account overbreadth exxon disclaims taking position admitting cwa displace compensatory remedies consequences water pollution even economic harms see reply brief petitioners concession however leaves exxon equally untenable claim cwa somehow preempts punitive damages compensatory damages economic loss nothing statutory text points fragmenting recovery scheme way rejected similar attempts sever remedies causes action see silkwood see clear indication congressional intent occupy entire field pollution remedies see texas order abrogate principle statute must speak directly question addressed common law internal quotation marks omitted matter perceive punitive damages private harms frustrating effect cwa remedial scheme point iv finally exxon raises issue first impression punitive damages maritime law falls within federal jurisdiction decide manner common law subject authority congress legislate otherwise disagrees judicial result see art iii cl see edmonds compagnie generale transatlantique admiralty law law great extent romero international terminal operating constitutional grant empowered federal courts continue development maritime law addition resistance derivative liability punitive damages preemption claim already disposed exxon challenges size remaining billion punitive damages award preemption argument offer legal ground concluding maritime law never award punitive damages none awarded case argue award exceeds bounds justified punitive damages goal deterring reckless worse behavior consequently heightened threat harm claim goes understanding place punishment modern civil law reasonable standards process administering punitive law subjects call starting brief account history behind today punitive damages modern doctrine punitive damages dates back least pair decisions common pleas recognized availability damages injury received wilkes wood lofft eng lord chief justice pratt wilkes wood one foundations fourth amendment exemplary damages awarded secretary state responsible unlawful search john wilkes papers spectacular see generally boyd huckle money wils eng judge recorded wilkes gave opinion upholding jury award government officer although jury confined oath consider mere personal injury perhaps damages thought damages sufficient awarding damages beyond compensatory however wholly novel idea even legal codes ancient times middle ages called multiple damages certain especially harmful acts see code hammurabi harper ed tenfold penalty stealing goat freed man statute gloucester edw ch stat large treble damages waste punitive damages common law innovation untethered strict numerical multipliers doctrine promptly crossed atlantic see genay norris coryell colbaugh become widely accepted american courts middle century see day woodworth early common law cases offered various rationales awards generally dubbed exemplary implying verdicts justified punishment extraordinary wrongdoing wilkes case sometimes though extraordinary element emphasized damages award punishment example sake tullidge wade wils eng lord chief justice wilmot deter proceeding future wilkes supra eng see also coryell supra instructing jury give damages example sake prevent offences future third historical justification showed early cases noted recent commentators need compensate intangible injuries compensation otherwise available narrow conception compensatory damages prevalent time cooper industries leatherman tool group citing inter alia note exemplary damages law torts harv rev see sebok punitive damages rev arguing punitive damages never served compensatory function attributed cooper century progressed types compensatory damages available plaintiffs broadened cooper industries supra consequence american courts tended speak punitive damages separate distinct compensatory damages see day supra punitive damages hav view enormity offence rather measure compensation plaintiff see generally schlueter punitive damages ed hereinafter schlueter describing almost total eclipse compensatory function decades following regardless alternative rationales years consensus today punitives aimed compensation principally retribution deterring harmful consensus informs doctrine modern american jurisdictions juries customarily instructed twin goals punitive awards see cal jury civil must determine whether award punitive damages defendant sake example way punishment pattern jury civil purpose punitive damages compensate plaintiff punish defendant thereby discourage defendant acting similar way future prevailing rule american courts also limits punitive damages cases day supra spoke enormity defendant conduct outrageous restatement owing gross negligence willful wanton reckless indifference rights others behavior even deplorable schlueter umbrellas punishment aim deterrence degrees relative blameworthiness apparent reckless conduct intentional malicious necessarily callous toward risk harming others opposed unheedful see restatement comment pp recklessness may consist either two different types conduct one actor knows reason know facts create high degree risk harm another deliberately proceeds act fail act conscious disregard indifference risk actor knowledge reason know facts realize appreciate high degree risk involved although reasonable man position action taken omitted order augment profit represents enhanced degree punishable culpability course willful malicious action taken purpose injure see comment determining amount punitive damages trier fact properly consider merely act circumstances including motives wrongdoer cf alaska stat higher statutory limit applies conduct motivated financial gain adverse consequences known defendant ark code ann statutory limit apply defendant intentionally pursued course conduct purpose causing injury damage regardless culpability however heavier punitive awards thought justifiable wrongdoing hard detect increasing chances getting away see bmw north america gore higher ratio may also justified cases injury hard detect value injury corresponding compensatory award small providing low incentives sue see ibid ow awards compensatory damages may properly support higher ratio example particularly egregious act resulted small amount economic damages restatement comment thus award nominal damages enough support award punitive damages tort committed outrageous purpose significant harm resulted broadly analogous object regulatory schemes provide statute multiple recovery order induce private litigation supplement official enforcement might fall short unaided see reiter sonotone discussing antitrust treble damages state regulation punitive damages varies award rarely nebraska bars punitive damages entirely state constitutional grounds see distinctive printing packaging cox neb per curiam four others permit punitive damages authorized statute louisiana massachusetts washington matter common law new hampshire statute codifying common law tradition see ross conoco la flesner technical communications mass fisher properties rev stat ann see also fay parker michigan courts recognize exemplary damages supportable compensatory rather truly punitive see peisner detroit free press app connecticut courts limited call punitive recovery expenses bringing legal action including attorney fees less taxable costs larsen chelsey realty larsen procedure american jurisdictions amount punitive award generally determined jury first instance determination reviewed trial appellate courts ensure reasonable pacific mut life ins haslip see also honda motor oberg many gone imposing statutory limits punitive awards form absolute monetary caps see code ann lexis cap maximum ratio punitive compensatory damages see ohio rev code ann lexis ratio tort cases frequently combination two see alaska stat greater ratio actions rely multiplier adopted variety ratios ranging despite limitations punitive damages overall higher frequent anywhere else see gotanda punitive damages comparative analysis colum schlueter england wales punitive exemplary damages available oppressive arbitrary unconstitutional action government servants injuries designed defendant yield larger profit likely cost compensatory damages conduct punitive damages expressly authorized statute rookes barnard even circumstances punitive damages allowed subject strict judicially imposed guidelines appeal thompson commissioner police metropolis said ratio three times amount compensatory damages rarely appropriate awards less likely unnecessary awards exceptional considered top contrast american practice canada australia allow exemplary damages outrageous conduct awards considered extraordinary rarely issue see schlueter noncompensatory damages part tradition thus unavailable countries france germany austria switzerland see legal systems decline recognize punitive damages refuse enforce foreign punitive judgments contrary public policy see gotanda charting developments concerning punitive damages tide changing colum noting refusals enforce judgments japanese italian german courts positing refusals may decline concluding american parties anticipate smooth sailing seeking domestic punitive damages award recognized enforced countries american punitive damages target audible criticism recent decades see note developments paths civil litigation harv rev surveying criticism recent studies tend undercut much see survey literature reveals discretion award punitive damages runaway awards although studies show dollar amounts awards growing time even real accounts median ratio punitive compensatory awards remained less data substantiate marked increase percentage cases punitive awards past several figures thus show overall restraint suggest many instances high ratio punitive compensatory damages substantially greater necessary punish deter real problem seems stark unpredictability punitive awards courts law concerned fairness consistency evidence median ratio punitive compensatory awards falls within reasonable zone punitive awards infrequent fails tell us whether spread high low individual awards acceptable available data suggest recent comprehensive study punitive damages awarded juries state civil trials found median ratio punitive compensatory awards mean ratio standard deviation juries judges punitive damages even us unsophisticated statistics thrust figures clear spread great outlier cases subject defendants punitive damages dwarf corresponding compensatories distribution awards narrower still remarkable among punitive damages assessed judges median ratio mean ratio standard deviation ibid studies data show fully punitive awards greater four times compensatory damages see cohen punitives trebling compensatory damages see ostrom rottman goerdt step anecdote profile civil jury judicature study financial injury cases using different data set found punitive awards greater three times corresponding compensatory damages financial injury jury verdicts starting premise regime ranges variation might acceptable even desirable resulted judges juries refining judgments reach generally accepted optimal level penalty deterrence cases involving wide range circumstances producing fairly consistent results cases similar facts cf txo production alliance resources plurality opinion anecdotal evidence suggests nothing sort going one leading cases punitive damages million verdict alabama jury noted second alabama case strikingly similar facts produced comparable amount compensatory damages punitive damages see gore alabama candidly explained disparity two jury verdicts reflection inherent uncertainty trial process bmw north america gore per curiam aware scholarly work pointing consistency across punitive awards cases involving similar claims response outlier punitive damages awards thus far confined claims constitutional level cases announced due process standards every award must pass see state farm mut automobile ins campbell gore although consistently rejected notion constitutional line marked simple mathematical formula determined awards exceeding ratio punitive compensatory damages significant degree satisfy due process state farm hen compensatory damages substantial lesser ratio perhaps equal compensatory damages reach outermost limit due process guarantee ibid today enquiry differs due process review case arises federal maritime jurisdiction reviewing jury award conformity maritime law rather outer limit allowed due process examining verdict exercise federal maritime common law authority precedes obviate application constitutional standard due process cases contrary involved awards subject first instance state law see fraud intentional infliction emotional distress utah law gore supra fraud alabama law txo supra plurality opinion slander title west virginia law haslip fraud alabama law cases provide occasion consider standard excessiveness industries matter federal law within appellate authority constitutional due process issue review punitive damages today considers intersection constitution desirability regulating common law remedy responsibility lies source law absence statute whatever may constitutional significance unpredictability high punitive awards feature happenstance tension function awards punitive implication unfairness eccentrically high punitive verdict carries system whose commonly held notion law rests sense fairness dealing one another thus penalty reasonably predictable severity even justice holmes bad man look ahead ability know stakes choosing one course action another see path law harv rev bad man counterparts turn time time penalty scheme face threaten fair probability suffering like degree wreak like damage cf koon noting need reduce unjustified disparities criminal sentencing reach toward evenhandedness neutrality distinguishing marks principled system justice common sense justice surely bar penalties reasonable people think excessive harm caused circumstances aim three basic approaches consider one verbal two quantitative mentioned number state courts settled criteria judicial review awards go well beyond traditional shock conscience passion prejudice tests maryland example set forth nonexclusive list nine review factors state common law include degree heinousness deterrence value award hether punitive award bears reasonable relationship compensatory damages awarded bowden caldor md alabama seven general criteria actual likely harm defendant conduct degree reprehensibility wrongful conduct profitable defendant green oil hornsby internal quotation marks omitted see mcclain metabolife supp nd noting deciding claim review green oil unconstitutionally vague inadequate judicial review criteria brought bear juries render verdicts instructions offering best guidance specific reaching appropriate penalty maryland example allows punitive damages intentional torts conduct characterized actual malice gypsum mayor city council baltimore md juries may instructed award punitive damages amount deter defendant others similar conduct proportionate wrongfulness defendant conduct defendant ability pay designed bankrupt financially destroy defendant md pattern jury civil ed alabama juries instructed fix amount considering character degree wrong shown evidence case necessity preventing similar wrongs pattern jury civil supp examples leave us skeptical verbal formulations superimposed general jury instructions best insurance unpredictable outliers instructions go far promoting systemic consistency awards tied specifically proven items damage cost medical treatment say although judges take approach may well produce results dint valiant effort experience attempts produce consistency analogous business criminal sentencing leaves us doubtful anything quantified approach work glance experience explain skepticism points similarity obvious unitive damages advance interests punishment deterrence also among interests advanced criminal law industries see also restatement comment purposes punitive damages fine imposed conviction crime requiring sentencing courts consider inter alia need sentence imposed provide punishment offense afford adequate deterrence criminal conduct sentencing commission guidelines manual comment instructive last quarter century federal sentencing rejected indeterminate system relatively unguided discretion sentence within wide range similarly situated offenders sentenced actually serve widely disparate sentences instead became system detailed guidelines tied exactly quantified sentencing results authority sentencing reform act et seq ed supp importance us old federal sentencing system general standards cohort even seasoned judicial defied consistency judges defendants alike eft large wandering deserts uncharted discretion frankel criminal sentences law without order much position imposing punitive damages today judges juries except lack even statutory maximum restraint beyond core sense fairness due process limit federal criminal law development many state parallels strongly suggests long guidelines corresponding federal state sentencing guidelines inevitable specific amount punitive damages awarded whether judge jury arbitrary mathias accor economy lodging better judgment eliminating unpredictable outlying punitive awards rigorous standards constitutional limit probably take form adopted looked pattern quantified limits one option follow set hard dollar cap punitive damages see supra course arguably come closest criminal law rather like setting maximum term years trouble though standard tort contract injury making difficult settle upon particular dollar figure appropriate across board course judicial selection dollar cap carry serious drawback legislature pick figure index inflation revisit provision whenever seems need tinkering say issue show docket see jones laughlin steel pfeifer declining adopt fixed formula account inflation discounting future wages present value light unpredictability inflation rates variation among cases promising alternative leave effects inflation jury judge assesses value actual loss pegging punitive compensatory damages using ratio maximum multiple see ali enterprise responsibility personal injury reporters study hereinafter ali reporters study compensatory award successful case starting point calculating punitive award aba report special comm punitive damages section litigation punitive damages constructive examination recommending presumptive damages ratio earlier canvass state experience showed model many adopted see supra congress passed analogous legislation time time example providing treble damages antitrust racketeering patent trademark actions see ed supp course potential relevance ratio compensatory punitive damages indisputable central feature due process analysis see state farm gore still murmur smacks much policy little principle cf moviecolor eastman kodak answer rests fact acting position common law last review faced perceived defect common law remedy traditionally courts accepted primary responsibility reviewing punitive damages thus evolution absence legislation judicially derived standards leave door open outlier awards hard see judiciary wash hands problem created simply calling quantified standards legislative see state farm supra ginsburg dissenting legislative scheme state high design cap punitive damages handiwork setting benchmarks hardly questioned ali reporters study recommending adoption ratio probably legislatively although possibly judicially history certainly support notion judges use numbers period rule perpetuities judicial innovation see cadell palmer clark finnelly eng exact limitations periods civil actions sometimes borrowing statutes see preston newsom limitation actions ed often without statutory account draw see wood limitations actions ed examples see blackstone commentaries laws england listing common law age apparent statutory basis course adopting ratio less judicial picking one outer limit constitutionality punitive awards see state farm supra although legal landscape well populated examples ratios multipliers expressing policies retribution deterrence suffer features stand way borrowing paradigms reasonable limitations suited application case slim majority ratio adopted others see fit apply lower one see rev stat ann ohio rev code ann lexis gone higher see mo ann stat supp judgments may differ weight given slight majority one feature schemes dissuades us selecting statutory exceptions generally intentional infliction physical injury harm see code ark code ann ratios apply across board using different fixed multipliers upper limit directed cases like one tortious action worse negligent less exposing tortfeasor certain regulatory sanctions inevitable damage actions ratio also applies awards quite different cases involving egregious conduct including malicious behavior dangerous activity carried purpose increasing tortfeasor financial confront instead case reckless action profitless tortfeasor resulting substantial recovery substantial injury thus legislative judgment reasonable limit overall judgment reasonable limit particular type case somewhat different reasons pertinence ratio adopted statutes offering compensatory damages plus bounty double amount open question federal statutes govern areas far afield maritime concerns mention relevance governing rules patent trademark cases say doubtful best instances know considerations went making rule application know example congress devised treble damages remedy private antitrust actions eye supplementing official enforcement inducing private litigation might otherwise rare nothing compensatory damages available end day see reiter concern traction case staggering damage inevitably provoking governmental enforcers indict number private parties sue take another example although provides criminal penalty twice crime victim loss penalty alternative specific fine amounts courts may impose option see fact makes us wary reading much congress choice ratio one provision state environmental schemes offer little support one thing insofar appear punish even negligence see mass laws ch others target willful conduct see del code tit undershoot others may overshoot target another chosen treble damages others punish environmental harms multiples see rev stat ann damages times harm caused private property oil discharge stat ann civil penalty times costs removing unlawful solid waste legislative signposts point way clearly sound indication reasonable limit better evidence accepted limit reasonable civil penalty however several studies mentioned showing median ratio punitive compensatory verdicts reflecting juries judges considered reasonable across many hundreds punitive awards see supra think fair assume greater share verdicts studied comprehensive collections reflect reasonable judgments economic penalties appropriate particular cases studies cover cases well least blameworthy conduct triggering punitive liability malice avarice recklessness even gross negligence jurisdictions data put median ratio entire gamut circumstances less see supra meaning compensatory award exceeds punitive award cases system expect awards median lower roughly express jurors sense reasonable penalties cases earmarks exceptional blameworthiness within punishable spectrum cases like one without intentional malicious conduct without behavior driven primarily desire gain example cases like one without modest economic harm odds detection opened door higher awards also seems fair suppose unpredictable outlier cases call fairness system question median theory factfinder deliberation go awry produce low ratio basis assume case sport cases serious constitutional issues coming us naturally high side see state farm ratio gore ratio assumptions median ratio punitive compensatory damages probably marks line near cases like one largely grouped accordingly given need protect possibility disruptive cost legal system awards unpredictable unnecessary either deterrence measured retribution consider ratio median award fair upper limit maritime provision cwa respecting daily fines confirms judgment anything greater excessive cases type congress set criminal penalties per day negligent violations pollution restrictions per day knowing ones discretion double penalty knowing action compares discretion double civil liability conduct going beyond negligence meriting punitive treatment explanation constitutional upper limit confirms ratio low state farm said maximum appropriate exceptional cases hen compensatory damages substantial lesser ratio perhaps equal compensatory damages reach outermost limit due process guarantee applying standard present case take granted district calculation total relevant compensatory damages million see exxon valdez supp alaska ratio thus yields maximum punitive damages amount therefore vacate judgment remand case appeals remit punitive damages award accordingly ordered justice alito took part consideration decision case exxon shipping company et petitioners grant baker et al writ certiorari appeals ninth circuit june justice scalia justice thomas joins concurring join opinion including portions refer constitutional limits prior opinions imposed upon punitive damages agree argumentation based upon prior holdings continue believe holdings error see state farm mut automobile ins campbell scalia dissenting exxon shipping company et petitioners grant baker et al writ certiorari appeals ninth circuit june justice stevens concurring part dissenting part join parts ii iii opinion believe congress rather make empirical judgments expressed part iv maritime law law great extent ante quoting edmonds compagnie generale transatlantique also statutory law great extent indeed aritime tort law dominated federal statute miles apex marine reason faced choice performing traditional task appellate judges reviewing acceptability award punitive damages one hand embarking new lawmaking venture carefully consider whether legislative body better equipped perform task hand boyle technologies stevens dissenting evidence congress affirmatively chosen restrict availability particular remedy favors adherence policy judicial restraint absence special justification fails offer justification also ignores particular features maritime law may counsel imposing sort limitation announces today applying traditional standard well grounded common law affirm judgment appeals explained miles apex marine admiralty must vigilant overstep boundaries imposed federal legislation light many statutes governing liability admiralty law absence limitation award sort issue case suggests congress wish us create new rule restricting liability wrongdoer like exxon example limitation shipowners liability act limitation act app statute part fabric law since provides relevant part liability owner vessel whether american foreign embezzlement loss destruction person property goods merchandise shipped put onboard vessel loss damage injury collision act matter thing loss damage forfeiture done occasioned incurred without privity knowledge owner owners shall except cases provided subsection section exceed amount value interest owner vessel freight pending emphasis added statute operates shield liability shipowners charged wrongdoing committed without privity knowledge limitation act protections thus render large punitive damages awards functionally unavailable wide swath admiralty exxon evidently invoke protection limitation act recognized futility attempting establish lacked privity knowledge captain hazelwood although existence limitation act resolve case fact congress chose provide generous protection liability without including party like exxon within protection counsels extending similar benefit limitation act one several statutes point conclusion pipeline authorization act tapaa stat et congress altered liability regime governing certain types alaskan oil spills imposing strict liability also capping recovery notably restrict availability punitive exxon unsuccessfully argued tapaa precluded punitive damages earlier stage litigation see app today rightly decides passing clean water act congress displace way diminish availability punitive damages remedies ante congressional choice limit availability punitive damages maritime law viewed invitation make policy judgments basis evidence public domain congress better able evaluate ii analysis empirical data assembled problematic several reasons first believe fails recognize unique feature maritime law may counsel uncritical reliance data tort cases general maritime law limits availability compensatory damages maritime courts bar recovery negligent infliction purely emotional distress see schoenbaum admiralty maritime law ed view many courts maritime law precludes recovery purely economic losses absent direct physical damage property proprietary interest maritime law context punitive damages may serve compensate certain sorts intangible injuries recoverable rubric compensation observed cooper industries leatherman tool group well century punitive damages frequently operated compensate intangible injuries compensation otherwise available narrow conception compensatory damages prevalent time types compensatory damages available plaintiffs broadened see nates kimball axelrod goldstein damages tort actions pain suffering generally available species compensatory damages theory behind punitive damages shifted toward purely punitive understanding although sorts intangible injuries largely species ordinary compensatory damages general tort law appears maritime law continues treat injuries less fully compensable compensable accordingly may less reason limit punitive damages sphere second caps ratios sort relies upon discussion typically imposed legislatures courts although offers great deal evidence acted various ways limit punitive damages telling fails identify single state imposed precise ratio today authority state legislatures done course indeed congress encounter obstacle matter federal law congress far better situated assess empirical data balance competing policy interests making concedes although american punitive damages target audible criticism recent decades recent studies tend undercut much criticism ante acknowledges survey literature reveals discretion award punitive damages runaway awards ibid concludes real problem large outlier awards data seem bear never explains review precise antidote unfairness inherent excessive awards congress orders us impose rigid formula govern award punitive damages maritime cases employ familiar standard constitutional issue raised role appellate least federal system merely review trial standard cooper industries see also pacific mut life ins haslip traditional approach amount punitive award initially determined jury instructed consider gravity wrong need deter similar wrongful conduct jury determination reviewed trial appellate courts ensure reasonable standard persuaded reviewing invalidate light exxon decision permit lapsed alcoholic command supertanker carrying tens millions gallons crude oil treacherous waters prince william sound thereby endangering individuals depended upon sound livelihoods jury reasonably given expression moral condemnation exxon conduct form award cooper industries adhere principle better becomes humane liberal character proceedings admiralty give withhold remedy required withhold established inflexible rules moragne marine lines quoting chief justice chase sea gull cas cc md question possesses power craft rule announces today judgment errs accordingly respectfully dissent parts iv opinion judgment exxon shipping company et petitioners grant baker et al writ certiorari appeals ninth circuit june justice ginsburg concurring part dissenting part join parts ii iii opinion dissent parts iv case unlike recent forays domain state tort law banner substantive due process see state farm mut automobile ins campbell reining awards punitive damages bmw north america gore controversy presented arises federal maritime jurisdiction ante opinion beyond question possesses power craft rule announces today ante stevens concurring part dissenting part issue therefore whether though competent act nevertheless leave matter congress explained well stated comprehensive opinion taken lead recognizing question close share justice stevens view congress better equipped decisionmaker first question whether urgent need maritime law break away traditional approach punitive damages determined properly instructed jury followed review ensure award reasonable pacific mut life ins haslip acknowledges traditional approach runaway awards ante endangered settlement negotiations ante asserted outlier awards insufficiently checked review occur often problematic maritime cases areas governed federal law second assuming problem need solution lawmaking prompts many questions ratio good case believes exxon conduct ranked low end blameworthiness scale exxon seeking augment profit act purpose injure ante ratio set defendants acted maliciously pursuit financial gain see ante magnitude risk increase ratio much horrendous spill valdez millions gallons might spilled result captain hazelwood attempt rock boat reef see ante opinion cf txo production alliance resources plurality opinion using potential loss plaintiff guide determining whether jury verdict excessive end holding ceiling also signaling ratio higher held exceed constitutional outer limit see ante next opportunity rule definitively ceiling due process requires federal claims heightening reservations solution justice stevens comment venturesome character decision observes fixed ratios caps adopted legislatures identified state imposed precise ratio lieu looking legislature appropriate source numerical damage limitation ante reasons stated agree justice stevens new law made left congress therefore affirm judgment appeals exxon shipping company et petitioners grant baker et al writ certiorari appeals ninth circuit june justice breyer concurring part dissenting part join parts ii iii opinion disagree conclusion parts iv punitive damages award case must reduced like believe need grounded rule law assure punitive damages awarded according meaningful standards provide notice harshly certain acts punished help assure uniform treatment similarly situated persons see bmw north america gore breyer concurring legal standards however secure objectives without rigidity absolute fixed numerical ratio demands setting forth constitutional due process limits size punitive damages awards example said awards exceeding ratio punitive compensatory damages significant degree satisfy due process state farm mut automobile ins campbell emphasis added thus foresaw exceptions numerical constraint view limited exception ratio warranted facts set forth part opinion make clear case reckless behavior jury reasonably believed exxon knowingly allowed relapsed alcoholic repeatedly pilot vessel filled millions gallons oil waters provided livelihood many plaintiffs case given conduct matter time crash spill like occurred justice ginsburg points damage easily much worse see ante jury thought facts justified punitive damages billion see ante opinion district agreed engaged exacting review award twice three times penetrating inquiry time case twice remanded reconsideration light due process cases district previously chance consider supp alaska time concluded billion award justified facts case based large part fact exxon conduct highly reprehensible reduced award slightly appeals specifically demanded ibid see also appeals finally took matters hands concluded facts justified award billion see per curiam specifically noted egregious nature exxon conduct ibid apparently reason believed facts case justifie considerably higher ratio ratio applied recent due process case adopts ibid find reasoned basis disagree appeals conclusion special case justifying exception strict application majority numerical rule punitive damages award us already represents reduction amount district strongly believed appropriate uphold footnotes turned tanker survived accident remained exxon fleet subsequently transferred wholly owned subsidiary seariver maritime inc valdez renamed several times finally seariver mediterranean carried oil persian gulf japan singapore australia years ship pulled service foreign port owners wo say prepared retirement although according reports vessel continues service foreign flag exxon valdez spill anniversary marked oil spill intelligence report mar jury asked consider possibility degree fault beyond range reckless conduct record sent us shows thought given trial plan authorized jury findings greater degrees culpability see app plan adopted whatever reason baker argue error baker emphasizes phase jury instructions also allowed jury find exxon independently reckless evidence fixing exxon punitive liability phase iii revolved around recklessness company officials supervising hazelwood enforcing exxon alcohol policies thus baker argues entirely possible jury found exxon reckless right way predicated liability punitive damages exxon responsibility hazelwood conduct brief respondents fact remains however jury required state basis exxon recklessness basis finding exxon recklessness hazelwood error instructing latter ground overlooked impossible know view general verdict returned whether jury imposed liability permissible impermissible ground judgment must reversed case remanded greenbelt cooperative publishing bresler internal quotation marks omitted compare protectus alpha nav north pacific grain growers adopting restatement second torts rule ceh seafarer boat rentals steel fuhrman rules exxon sought relief inapplicable face see fed rules civ proc rules less inapt allow respectively entry judgment matter law alteration amendment judgment oral argument counsel exxon ultimately characterized motion one rule tr oral arg say rules less inapt rules long way saying apt motion rule allowed unless movant sought relief similar grounds rule case submitted jury see rule see also zachar lee wright miller federal practice procedure pp ed rule permits alter amend judgment may used relitigate old matters raise arguments present evidence raised prior entry judgment wright miller federal practice procedure pp ed footnotes omitted exxon unable demonstrate rule supported motion need choose best worst risk implying motion appropriate rule suffice say whatever type motion supposed late say though appeals gave short shrift district commendable management gargantuan litigation case turned propriety circuit decision reach preemption issue take claim exceeded discretion instead say extent ninth circuit implied unusual circumstances case called exception regular practice think record points way course appeals correct case complex significant much fact district fairly required divide four phases oversee class people manage motions industry threatened halt progress completely complexity case eliminate value waiver forfeiture rules ensure parties determine issue case litigation remains extent possible orderly progression reason rules litigation game like golf arbitrary rules test skill players rather litigation process procedures preserving waiving issues part machinery courts narrow remains decided poliquin garden way boudin citation omitted district sensible efforts impose order upon issues play progress trial deserve respect respect case differs two invoked exxon middlesex county sewerage authority national sea clammers milwaukee illinois plaintiffs common law nuisance claims amounted arguments standards different provided cwa baker private claims economic injury threaten similar interference federal regulatory goals respect water shorelines natural resources indeed least one treatise writer asserted doctrine authentically damages judgments ostensibly included punitive damages reality full compensation pacific mut life ins haslip scalia concurring judgment citing greenleaf law evidence ed view however widely shared haslip supra scalia concurring judgment citing prominent treatises whatever actual importance subterfuge compensation may declined see moskovitz mount sinai medical center ohio purpose punitive damages compensate plaintiff punish deter certain conduct hamilton development broad rock club loitz remington arms green oil hornsby masaki general motors haw see also cooper industries leatherman tool group punitive damages intended punish defendant deter future wrongdoing state farm mut automobile ins campbell unitive damages aimed deterrence retribution restatement comment standards torts context different standards apply causes action like procedure followed case without objection see mo rev stat ann vernon supp greater cases code greater million personal injury suits actions cent code ann supp greater rev stat ann oklahoma graduated scheme limit punitive award turning nature defendant conduct see okla tit west greater cases involving reckless disregard greater financial benefit derived defendant cases intentional malicious conduct limit conduct intentional malicious life threatening see rand institute civil justice hensler moller trends punitive damages table mar finding increase median awards early early san francisco cook counties moller pace carroll punitive damages financial injury jury verdicts legal studies hereinafter financial injury jury verdicts studying jury verdicts financial injury cases six cook county illinois finding marked increase median award late early peterson sarma shanley punitive damages empirical findings rand institute civil justice hereinafter punitive damages empirical findings finding median punitive award increased nearly times san francisco county early early times cook county period see eisenberg et juries judges punitive damages empirical analyses using civil justice survey state courts data empirical legal studies hereinafter juries judges punitive damages analyzing bureau justice statistics data concluding statistically significant variation exists punitive award level three time periods dept justice bureau justice statistics cohen punitive damage awards large counties mar hereinafter cohen compiling data nation populous counties finding median punitive damage award civil jury trials decreased see juries judges punitive damages reporting median ratios jury trials bench trials using bureau justice statistics data vidmar rose punitive damages juries florida harv legis studying civil cases florida state courts finding median ratio see financial injury jury verdicts finding median ratio financial injury cases late early see cohen compiling data nation populous counties finding jury trials plaintiff prevailed percentage cases involving punitive awards financial injury jury verdicts finding statistically significant decrease percentage verdicts financial injury cases include punitive damage award early early see punitive damages empirical findings finding increase percentage civil trials resulting punitive damage awards san francisco cook counties one might posit ill effects punitive damages clearest actual awards shadow punitive regime casts settlement negotiations litigation decisions see financial injury jury verdicts polinsky punitive damages really insignificant predictable rational legal studies data established clear correlation see eaton mustard talarico effects seeking punitive damages processing tort claims legal studies studying data six georgia counties concluding decision seek punitive damages statistically significant impact whether case disposed done trial procedure including settlement whether case disposed means trial likely settled kritzer zemans shadow punitives rev noting theory punitive damages cast large shadow settlement negotiations finding perhaps one exception little systematic evidence find support notion emphasis deleted study examined representative sample state trials involving tort contract property cases disposed trial fiscal year calendar years three separate data sets cover state courts general jurisdiction random sample populous counties juries judges punitive damages information gathered directly clerks offices study rely litigants third parties report ibid aware body literature running parallel anecdotal reports examining predictability punitive awards conducting numerous mock juries different jurors confronted hypothetical case see sunstein hastie payne schkade viscusi punitive damages juries decide schkade sunstein kahneman deliberating dollars severity shift colum rev hastie schkade payne juror judgments civil cases effects plaintiff requests plaintiff identity punitive damage awards law hum behav sunstein kahneman schkade assessing punitive damages notes cognition valuation law yale research funded part exxon decline rely observation odds holding excessive fines clause eighth amendment apply punitive damages see conclusion reject punitive nature damages see rested entirely upon conviction concerns animate eighth amendment plac ing limits steps government may take individual ibid thus clause constrain award money damages civil suit government neither prosecuted action right receive share damages awarded noted similarities purpose criminal penalties punitive damages distinguished two basis differing levels state involvement see nagel structuring sentencing discretion new federal sentencing guidelines crim citing studies congressional hearings state counterparts federal statutes see stat cutting destroying tree intended use christmas tree punishable payment injured party five times tree value mass laws ch west discharging crude oil lake river tidal water flats subjects defendant double damages tort extent justice stevens suggests subject remedies treated congressional light number statutes dealing remedies see post opinion concurring part dissenting part think maritime cases contrary support judicial action modify common law landscape largely making character maritime law mixture statutes judicial standards amalgam traditional rules modifications rules newly created rules east river transamerica delaval accounts large part taken working governing maritime tort principles see ibid recognizing products liability part general maritime law american export lines alvez recognizing cause action loss consortium moragne marine lines recognizing cause action wrongful death reason exercise maritime jurisdiction reached creating new causes action one occasion follows free hand dealing issue entirely remedial matter general observation made reliable transfer abrogated admiralty rule divided damages favor proportional liability point urged creation new rule damages maritime collision cases task congress judiciary traditionally taken lead formulating flexible fair remedies law maritime congress largely left responsibility fashioning controlling rules admiralty law internal quotation marks omitted see also exxon sofec holding rule applies defendants proximately causing injury mcdermott amclyde adopting rule calculation nonsettling maritime tort defendants compensatory liability indeed compensatory remedy sought case entirely judicial creation common law traditionally compensate purely economic harms unaccompanied injury person property see abraham forms functions tort law ed see robins dry dock repair dahl imposing rule maritime context courts occasionally created exceptions rule perhaps noteworthy involve cases damage party seems cause action abraham supra discussing union oil oppen recognizing exception commercial fishermen raise point express agreement disagreement ninth circuit rule illustrate entirely nature landscape surveying sure congress retains superior authority matters era admiralty look primarily legislative enactments policy guidance miles apex marine may slough responsibilities common law remedies congress made first move absence federal legislation constraining punitive damages imply congressional decision quantified rule cf rapanos plurality opinion noting skepticism towards reading tea leaves congressional inaction need new remedial maritime rule past precedent argues setting judicially derived standard subject course congressional revision see reliable transfer supra although jury heard evidence exxon may felt constrained give hazelwood shoreside assignment concern course might open liabilities personnel litigation employee might initiate see app pet cert consideration indeed existed hardly constitutes action taken specific purpose cause harm expense established duty thus treat case categorically one recklessness jury finding making point contrast cases falling within categories even greater fault mean suggest exxon hazelwood failings less reprehensible two ratios provide slightly larger awards actions involving type strategic financial wrongdoing exceptions seem apply subset cases see alaska stat defendant conduct motivated financial gain adverse consequences conduct actually known defendant person responsible making policy decisions behalf defendant normal limit replaced greater four times compensatory damages four times aggregate financial gain defendant received result misconduct million stat normal limit replaced greater million defendant wrongful conduct motivated solely unreasonable financial gain unreasonably dangerous nature conduct together high likelihood injury actually known managing agent director officer person responsible making policy decisions behalf defendant see antitrust racketeering patent trademark ed supp plant variety protections real estate settlement antikickback provision consumer credit protection see supra spread among studies reasons conclusion answer justice stevens suggestion post adequate restraint appellate review trial judge review punitive jury award judge award nonjury cases see much promise practical solution outlier problem possibility justice stevens find abuse discretion allowing billion balance jury punitive verdict yet five times size award jury practice judgment signal reasonable case sort dissent also suggests maritime tort law needs quantified limit punitive awards less tort law generally punitives may mitigate maritime law less generous scheme compensatory damages post instructions case allow jury set punitives basis consideration see jury instruction app brief opposition purposes punitive damages awarded punish wrongdoer extraordinary misconduct warn defendants others deter size underlying compensatory damages bespeak economic inadequacy case support argument maritime compensatory awards need supplementing long held unitive damages definition intended compensate injured party rather punish tortfeasor deter others similar extreme conduct newport fact concerts see supra indeed argument generous punitive damages maritime cases call question maritime applicability constitutional limit punitive damages understood tied limit conception punitive damages awarded entirely punitive purpose see philip morris usa williams long made clear unitive damages may properly imposed state legitimate interests punishing unlawful conduct deterring quoting gore state farm unitive damages aimed deterrence retribution cooper industries ompensatory damages punitive damages serve distinct purposes former intended redress concrete loss plaintiff suffered latter operate fines intended punish defendant deter future wrongdoing criterion substantial takes account role punitive damages induce legal action pure compensation may enough encourage suit concern addressed opportunity class action large numbers potential plaintiffs involved cases individual awards touchstone class option facilitates suit class recovery million substantial case constitutional outer limit may well footnotes limitation act codified amended see pub stat see lewis lewis clark marine admiralty maritime law includes host special rights duties rules procedures among provisions limitation act act allows vessel owner limit liability damage injury occasioned without owner privity knowledge value vessel owner interest vessel coryell phipps one selects competent men store inspect vessel notice existence defect denied benefit limitation respects loss incurred explosion period storage unless become empty words testimony early phase protracted litigation confirmed much hearing district one exxon attorneys explained firm advised exxon exxon able sustain burden show lack privity knowledge use alcohol captain hazelwood app brief opposition although issue resolved evidence passing tapaa congress meant prevent application limitation act transportation oil house conference report includes following passage limitation liability act owner vessel entitled limit liability property damage caused vessel conferees concluded existing maritime law provide adequate compensation victims event kind catastrophe might occur consequently conferees established rule strict liability damages discharges oil transported pipeline conf see also glacier bay hold tapaa implicitly repealed limitation act regard transportation oil schoenbaum explains either general maritime law jones act recognizes right recover damages negligent infliction emotional distress unaccompanied physical injury see also gough natural gas pipeline purely emotional injuries compensable maritime law maritime plaintiffs satisfy injury impact latter limitation roots dry dock doctrine robins dry dock repair flint opinion holmes see barber lines donau maru opinion breyer tracing history purposes doctrine resolving adhere rule see also louisiana testbank en banc affirming rule denying recovery economic loss absent physical damage proprietary interest cases unintentional maritime tort see turner broadcasting system fcc plurality opinion institution congress far better equipped judiciary amass evaluate vast amounts data bearing upon issue complex dynamic presented internal quotation marks omitted patsy board regents relevant policy considerations invariably point one direction vehement disagreement validity assumptions underlying many difficulty policy considerations congress superior institutional competence pursue debate suggest legislative judicial solutions preferable points reliable transfer case adopted rule proportional liability maritime tort cases illustrative example power craft flexible fair remedies law maritime case however noted new proportional liability rule barred statutory judicial precept also adoption simply bring recovery property damage maritime collision cases line rule admiralty law long since established congress personal injury cases ibid contrast case failed demonstrate adoption rule announces brings maritime law line expressions congressional intent context idiosyncratic posture case makes true appellate review something counterfactual since billion award returned jury several intervening steps ultimately remitted billion ninth circuit order conform due process cases per curiam suffice say although constitutional limits standard identical case billion ninth circuit believed survived de novo constitutional scrutiny judgment also satisfy review