honda
motor
oberg
argued
april
decided
june
finding
petitioner
honda
motor
liable
injuries
respondent
oberg
received
driving
vehicle
manufactured
sold
honda
oregon
jury
awarded
oberg
punitive
damages
five
times
amount
compensatory
damages
award
affirming
state
appeals
state
rejected
honda
argument
punitive
damages
award
violated
due
process
excessive
oregon
courts
power
correct
excessive
verdicts
amendment
state
constitution
prohibits
judicial
review
amount
punitive
damages
awarded
jury
unless
affirmatively
say
evidence
support
verdict
latter
relied
heavily
fact
state
product
liability
punitive
damages
statute
jury
instructions
case
provided
least
much
guidance
upheld
pacific
mut
life
ins
haslip
also
declined
interpret
haslip
hold
due
process
requires
amount
punitive
damages
award
subject
appellate
review
noted
oregon
courts
powerless
may
vacate
judgment
evidence
supporting
jury
decision
appellate
review
available
test
sufficiency
jury
instructions
held
oregon
denial
review
size
punitive
damages
awards
violates
fourteenth
amendment
due
process
clause
pp
constitution
imposes
substantive
limit
size
punitive
damages
awards
pacific
mut
life
ins
haslip
txo
production
alliance
resources
opinions
cases
strongly
emphasized
importance
page
ii
procedural
component
due
process
clause
suggest
analysis
focus
oregon
departure
traditional
procedures
pp
judicial
review
size
punitive
damages
awards
safeguard
excessive
awards
common
law
see
blunt
little
modern
practice
federal
courts
every
state
except
oregon
judges
review
size
awards
see
dagnello
long
island
pp
dramatic
difference
judicial
review
common
law
scope
review
available
oregon
least
since
state
definitively
construed
amendment
van
lom
schneiderman
oregon
law
provided
procedure
reducing
setting
aside
punitive
damages
award
basis
relief
amount
awarded
oregon
half
century
inferred
passion
prejudice
size
damages
award
decade
even
hinted
might
possess
power
courts
power
state
mentioned
responding
honda
arguments
case
review
provided
ensures
evidence
support
punitive
damages
evidence
supports
amount
actually
awarded
thus
leaving
possibility
guilty
defendant
may
unjustly
punished
pp
hesitated
find
proceedings
violative
due
process
party
deprived
well
established
common
law
protection
arbitrary
inaccurate
adjudication
see
tumey
ohio
punitive
damages
pose
acute
danger
arbitrary
deprivation
property
since
jury
instructions
typically
leave
jury
wide
discretion
choosing
amounts
since
evidence
defendant
net
worth
creates
potential
juries
use
verdicts
express
biases
big
businesses
oregon
removed
one
procedural
safeguards
common
law
provided
danger
without
providing
substitute
procedure
without
indication
danger
way
subsided
time
hurtado
california
international
shoe
washington
distinguished
pp
safeguards
oberg
claims
oregon
provided
limitation
punitive
damages
amount
specified
complaint
clear
convincing
standard
proof
determination
maximum
allowable
punitive
damages
detailed
jury
instruction
adequately
safeguard
page
iii
arbitrary
awards
fact
jury
arbitrary
decision
acquit
defendant
charged
crime
unreviewable
offer
historic
basis
discretion
civil
cases
due
process
clause
says
nothing
arbitrary
grants
freedom
whole
purpose
prevent
arbitrary
deprivations
liberty
property
pp
stevens
delivered
opinion
blackmun
scalia
kennedy
souter
thomas
joined
scalia
filed
concurring
opinion
ginsburg
filed
dissenting
opinion
rehnquist
joined
honda
motor
oberg
justice
stevens
delivered
opinion
amendment
oregon
constitution
prohibits
judicial
review
amount
punitive
damages
awarded
jury
unless
affirmatively
say
evidence
support
verdict
question
presented
whether
prohibition
consistent
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
hold
petitioner
manufactured
sold
vehicle
overturned
respondent
driving
causing
severe
permanent
injuries
respondent
brought
suit
alleging
petitioner
knew
known
vehicle
inherently
unreasonably
dangerous
design
jury
found
petitioner
liable
awarded
respondent
compensatory
damages
punitive
damages
compensatory
damages
however
reduced
respondent
negligence
contributed
accident
appeal
relying
recent
decision
pacific
mut
life
ins
haslip
petitioner
argued
award
punitive
damages
violated
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
honda
motor
oberg
punitive
damages
excessive
oregon
courts
lacked
power
correct
excessive
verdicts
oregon
appeals
affirmed
oregon
latter
relied
heavily
fact
oregon
statute
governing
award
punitive
damages
product
liability
actions
jury
instructions
case
contain
substantive
criteria
provide
least
much
guidance
factfinders
alabama
statute
jury
instructions
upheld
haslip
oregon
also
noted
oregon
law
provides
additional
protection
requiring
plaintiff
prove
entitlement
punitive
damages
clear
convincing
evidence
rather
mere
preponderance
recognizing
state
courts
interpreted
haslip
including
clear
constitutional
mandate
meaningful
judicial
scrutiny
punitive
damage
awards
adams
murakami
honda
motor
oberg
see
also
alexander
alexander
evander
dixon
nevertheless
declined
interpret
haslip
hold
award
punitive
damages
comport
requirements
due
process
clause
always
must
subject
form
appellate
review
includes
possibility
remittitur
also
noted
trial
appellate
courts
entirely
powerless
judgment
may
vacated
evidence
support
jury
decision
appellate
review
available
test
sufficiency
jury
instructions
granted
certiorari
consider
whether
oregon
limited
judicial
review
size
punitive
damage
awards
consistent
decision
haslip
ii
recent
cases
recognized
constitution
imposes
substantive
limit
size
punitive
damage
awards
pacific
mut
life
ins
haslip
txo
production
alliance
resources
although
fail
draw
mathematical
bright
line
constitutionally
acceptable
constitutionally
unacceptable
slip
haslip
majority
justices
agreed
due
process
clause
imposes
limit
punitive
damage
awards
plurality
txo
assented
proposition
grossly
excessive
punitive
damages
violate
due
process
slip
justice
dissented
favored
rigorous
standards
noted
thus
common
ground
award
may
excessive
violate
due
process
slip
case
honda
motor
oberg
us
today
directly
concerned
character
standard
identify
unconstitutionally
excessive
awards
rather
confronted
question
procedures
necessary
ensure
punitive
damages
imposed
arbitrary
manner
specifically
question
whether
due
process
clause
requires
judicial
review
amount
punitive
damage
awards
opinions
haslip
txo
strongly
emphasized
importance
procedural
component
due
process
clause
haslip
held
common
law
method
assessing
punitive
damages
violate
procedural
due
process
holding
stressed
availability
meaningful
adequate
review
trial
subsequent
appellate
review
similarly
txo
plurality
opinion
found
fact
award
reviewed
upheld
trial
judge
unanimously
affirmed
appeal
gave
rise
strong
presumption
validity
slip
concurring
judgment
justice
scalia
joined
justice
thomas
considered
sufficient
traditional
common
law
procedures
followed
particular
noted
procedural
due
process
requires
judicial
review
punitive
damages
awards
reasonableness
slip
opinions
suggest
analysis
case
focus
oregon
departure
traditional
procedures
therefore
first
contrast
relevant
common
law
practice
oregon
procedure
state
described
system
trial
jury
judge
reduced
status
mere
monitor
van
lom
schneiderman
examine
constitutional
implications
oregon
deviation
established
common
law
procedures
honda
motor
oberg
iii
judicial
review
size
punitive
damage
awards
safeguard
excessive
verdicts
long
punitive
damages
awarded
one
earliest
reported
cases
involving
exemplary
damages
huckle
money
wils
arose
king
george
iii
attempt
punish
publishers
allegedly
seditious
north
briton
king
agents
arrested
plaintiff
journeyman
printer
home
detained
six
hours
although
defendants
treated
plaintiff
rather
well
feeding
beefsteaks
beer
suffered
little
damages
jury
awarded
enormous
sum
almost
three
hundred
times
plaintiff
weekly
wage
defendant
lawyer
requested
new
trial
arguing
jury
award
excessive
plaintiff
counsel
hand
argued
cases
tort
never
interpose
setting
aside
verdicts
excessive
damages
denied
motion
new
trial
chief
justice
explicitly
rejected
plaintiff
absolute
rule
review
damages
amounts
instead
noted
damages
outrageous
mankind
first
blush
must
think
may
grant
new
trial
excessive
damages
accord
view
amount
award
relevant
motion
new
trial
chief
justice
noted
pon
whole
opinion
damages
excessive
ibid
subsequent
english
cases
generally
deferring
jury
determination
damages
steadfastly
upheld
power
order
new
trials
solely
basis
damages
high
fabrigas
mostyn
damages
may
monstrous
excessive
honda
motor
oberg
evidence
passion
partiality
jury
sharpe
brice
never
laid
grant
new
trial
excessive
damages
cases
tort
leith
pope
cases
tort
interpose
account
largeness
damages
unless
flagrantly
excessive
afford
internal
evidence
prejudice
partiality
jury
jones
sparrow
new
trial
granted
excessive
damages
goldsmith
lord
sefton
anst
exch
hewlett
cruchley
taunt
well
acknowledged
courts
westminster
hall
whether
actions
criminal
conversation
malicious
prosecutions
words
matter
damages
clearly
large
courts
send
inquiry
another
jury
respondent
calls
attention
case
beardmore
carrington
wils
asserted
one
single
case
law
books
found
granted
new
trial
excessive
damages
actions
torts
respondent
infer
statement
century
common
law
provide
honda
motor
oberg
judicial
review
damages
respondent
argument
overlooks
several
crucial
facts
first
beardmore
case
antedates
one
cases
cited
previous
paragraph
even
respondent
interpretation
case
correct
interpretation
english
courts
rejected
soon
thereafter
second
beardmore
cites
least
one
case
concedes
granted
new
trial
excessive
damages
chambers
robinson
str
although
characterizes
case
wrongly
decided
third
say
one
single
case
books
say
little
much
small
proportion
decided
cases
reported
example
year
beardmore
decided
common
pleas
cases
recorded
standard
reporter
wils
finally
inference
respondent
draw
century
english
common
law
permit
judge
order
new
trials
excessive
damages
explicitly
rejected
beardmore
cautioned
inference
desire
understood
say
lay
rule
never
happen
case
excessive
damages
tort
may
grant
new
trial
common
law
courts
followed
english
predecessors
providing
judicial
review
size
damage
awards
emphasized
deference
ordinarily
afforded
jury
verdicts
recognized
juries
sometimes
awarded
damages
high
require
correction
thus
justice
story
sitting
circuit
justice
ordered
new
trial
honda
motor
oberg
unless
plaintiff
agreed
reduction
damages
explaining
ruling
noted
question
excessive
damages
agree
may
grant
new
trial
excessive
damages
indeed
exercise
discretion
full
delicacy
difficulty
clearly
appear
jury
committed
gross
error
acted
improper
motives
given
damages
excessive
relation
person
injury
much
duty
interfere
prevent
wrong
case
blunt
little
cc
mass
century
ratification
fourteenth
amendment
many
american
courts
reviewed
damages
partiality
passion
prejudice
nevertheless
difficulty
probing
juror
reasoning
passion
prejudice
review
fact
review
amount
awards
judges
infer
passion
prejudice
partiality
size
award
coffin
coffin
mass
honda
motor
oberg
cases
personal
injury
verdict
may
set
aside
excessive
damages
exorbitancy
must
conclude
jury
acted
passion
partiality
corruption
taylor
giger
actions
tort
new
trial
granted
excessiveness
damages
unless
damages
found
enormous
shew
jury
improper
influence
led
astray
violence
prejudice
passion
mcconnell
hampton
johns
granting
new
trial
excessive
damages
noting
courts
legal
right
grant
new
trials
excessive
damages
actions
tort
nowhere
denied
belknap
boston
maine
setting
aside
compensatory
punitive
damages
think
evident
jury
affected
partiality
prejudice
nineteenth
century
treatises
similarly
recognized
judges
authority
award
new
trials
basis
size
damage
awards
graham
treatise
law
new
trials
ed
ven
personal
torts
jury
find
outrageous
damages
clearly
evincing
partiality
prejudice
passion
interfere
relief
defendant
order
new
trial
sedgwick
treatise
measure
damages
ed
holds
liberty
set
aside
verdicts
grant
new
trials
whenever
damages
excessive
create
belief
jury
misled
either
passion
prejudice
ignorance
sutherland
treatise
law
damages
punitive
damages
submitted
jury
amount
honda
motor
oberg
may
think
proper
allow
accepted
unless
exorbitant
indicate
influenced
passion
prejudice
perverted
judgment
modern
practice
consistent
earlier
authorities
federal
courts
every
state
except
oregon
judges
review
size
damage
awards
see
dagnello
long
island
citing
cases
except
alaska
maryland
oregon
nome
ailak
alaska
alexander
alexander
dixon
evander
cert
denied
md
texaco
pennzoil
grimshaw
ford
motor
draper
excessiveness
inadequacy
punitive
damages
awarded
personal
injury
death
cases
schapper
judges
juries
appellate
review
federal
civil
jury
verdicts
iv
dramatic
difference
judicial
review
punitive
damages
awards
common
law
scope
review
available
oregon
oregon
trial
judge
oregon
appellate
may
order
new
trial
jury
properly
instructed
error
occurred
trial
evidence
support
punitive
damages
defendant
basis
relief
amount
punitive
damages
jury
awarded
oregon
provides
procedure
reducing
setting
aside
award
law
oregon
least
since
state
announced
opinion
van
lom
schneiderman
honda
motor
oberg
definitively
construing
amendment
oregon
constitution
case
held
power
reduce
set
aside
award
compensatory
punitive
damages
admittedly
excessive
recognized
constitutional
amendment
placing
limitation
power
departure
traditional
common
law
approach
opinion
characterization
oregon
lonely
eminence
regard
still
accurate
portrayal
unique
position
every
state
union
affords
judicial
review
honda
motor
oberg
amount
punitive
damages
award
see
supra
subsequent
decisions
reaffirmed
oregon
judges
lack
authority
order
new
trials
relief
remedy
excessive
damages
fowler
courtemanche
authorized
exercise
common
law
powers
unhesitatingly
hold
award
punitive
damages
excessive
tenold
weyerhaeuser
oregon
examine
jury
award
ensure
compliance
statutory
limit
noneconomic
damages
respondent
argues
oregon
procedures
deviate
common
law
practice
oregon
judges
power
examine
size
award
determine
whether
jury
influenced
passion
prejudice
simply
incorrect
earliest
oregon
cases
interpreting
amendment
squarely
held
oregon
courts
lack
precisely
power
timmins
hale
mcculley
homestead
bakery
although
dicta
later
cases
suggested
issue
might
eventually
revisited
see
van
lom
earlier
holdings
remain
oregon
law
oregon
half
century
inferred
passion
prejudice
size
damages
award
decade
even
hinted
courts
might
possess
power
finally
oregon
courts
evaluate
excessiveness
honda
motor
oberg
punitive
damage
awards
passion
prejudice
review
oregon
mentioned
power
case
petitioner
argued
oregon
procedures
unconstitutional
precisely
failed
provide
judicial
review
size
punitive
damage
awards
oregon
responded
rejecting
idea
judicial
review
size
punitive
damage
awards
required
haslip
noted
two
state
appellate
courts
including
california
reached
opposite
conclusion
respondent
claims
oregon
law
provides
passion
prejudice
review
excessive
verdicts
oregon
obvious
response
petitioner
argument
respondent
also
argues
oregon
provides
adequate
review
trial
judge
overturn
punitive
damage
award
substantial
evidence
support
award
punitive
damages
see
fowler
courtemanche
argument
unconvincing
review
provided
oregon
courts
ensures
evidence
support
punitive
damages
evidence
support
amount
actually
awarded
oregon
judicial
review
ensures
punitive
damages
awarded
defendants
entirely
innocent
conduct
warranting
exemplary
damages
oregon
unlike
common
law
provides
assurance
whose
conduct
sanctionable
punitive
damages
subjected
punitive
damages
arbitrary
amounts
concerned
possibility
guilty
defendant
may
unjustly
honda
motor
oberg
punished
evidence
guilt
warranting
punishment
substitute
evidence
providing
least
rational
basis
particular
deprivation
property
imposed
state
deter
future
wrongdoing
oregon
abrogation
well
established
common
law
protection
arbitrary
deprivations
property
raises
presumption
procedures
violate
due
process
clause
stated
first
due
process
cases
traditional
practice
provides
touchstone
constitutional
analysis
murray
hoboken
land
improvement
tumey
ohio
brown
mississippi
winship
burnham
superior
county
marin
pacific
mut
life
ins
haslip
basic
procedural
protections
common
law
regarded
fundamental
cases
arisen
party
complained
denial
fact
due
process
decisions
involve
arguments
traditional
procedures
provide
little
protection
additional
safeguards
necessary
ensure
compliance
constitution
ownbey
morgan
burnham
superior
county
marin
pacific
mut
life
haslip
nevertheless
handful
cases
party
deprived
liberty
property
without
safeguards
common
law
procedure
hurtado
california
tumey
ohio
brown
mississippi
oliver
winship
absent
procedures
provided
protection
arbitrary
inaccurate
adjudication
hesitated
find
honda
motor
oberg
proceedings
violative
due
process
tumey
ohio
brown
mississippi
oliver
winship
course
deviations
established
procedures
result
constitutional
infirmity
noted
hurtado
hold
procedural
change
unconstitutional
deny
every
quality
law
age
render
incapable
progress
improvement
review
cases
however
suggests
case
us
unlike
abrogations
common
law
procedures
upheld
hurtado
example
examination
neutral
magistrate
provided
criminal
defendants
nearly
protection
abrogated
common
law
grand
jury
procedure
oregon
contrast
provided
similar
substitute
protection
provided
judicial
review
amount
awarded
jury
punitive
damages
similarly
international
shoe
washington
upheld
extension
state
jurisdiction
persons
physically
present
spite
contrary
well
established
prior
practice
change
however
necessitated
growth
new
business
entity
corporation
whose
ability
conduct
business
without
physical
presence
created
new
problems
envisioned
rules
developed
another
era
see
burnham
addition
dramatic
improvements
communication
transportation
made
litigation
distant
forum
less
onerous
similar
social
changes
suggest
need
oregon
abrogation
judicial
review
improvements
technology
render
unchecked
punitive
damages
less
onerous
anything
rise
large
interstate
honda
motor
oberg
multinational
corporations
aggravated
problem
arbitrary
awards
potentially
biased
juries
punitive
damages
pose
acute
danger
arbitrary
deprivation
property
jury
instructions
typically
leave
jury
wide
discretion
choosing
amounts
presentation
evidence
defendant
net
worth
creates
potential
juries
use
verdicts
express
biases
big
businesses
particularly
without
strong
local
presences
judicial
review
amount
awarded
one
procedural
safeguards
common
law
provided
danger
oregon
removed
safeguard
without
providing
substitute
procedure
without
indication
danger
arbitrary
awards
way
subsided
time
reasons
hold
oregon
denial
judicial
review
size
punitive
damage
awards
violates
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
honda
motor
oberg
vi
respondent
argues
oregon
provided
safeguards
arbitrary
awards
event
exercise
unreviewable
power
jury
consistent
jury
historic
role
judicial
system
respondent
points
four
safeguards
provided
oregon
courts
limitation
punitive
damages
amount
specified
complaint
clear
convincing
standard
proof
determination
maximum
allowable
punitive
damages
detailed
jury
instructions
first
limitation
punitive
damages
amount
specified
hardly
constraint
limit
amount
plaintiff
request
unclear
whether
award
exceeding
amount
requested
set
aside
see
tenold
weyerhaeuser
oregon
constitution
bars
examining
jury
award
ensure
compliance
statutory
limit
noneconomic
damages
second
safeguard
clear
convincing
standard
proof
important
check
unwarranted
imposition
punitive
damages
like
substantial
evidence
review
discussed
supra
provides
assurance
whose
conduct
sanctionable
punitive
damages
subjected
punitive
damages
arbitrary
amounts
regarding
third
purported
constraint
respondent
cites
cases
support
idea
oregon
courts
set
maximum
punitive
damage
awards
advance
verdict
aware
implements
procedure
respondent
final
safeguard
proper
jury
instruction
well
established
course
important
check
excessive
awards
problem
concerns
us
however
possibility
honda
motor
oberg
jury
follow
instructions
may
return
lawless
biased
arbitrary
verdict
support
argument
historic
basis
making
jury
final
arbiter
amount
punitive
damages
respondent
calls
attention
early
civil
criminal
cases
jury
allowed
judge
law
well
facts
see
johnson
louisiana
powell
concurring
already
explained
civil
cases
jury
discretion
determine
amount
damages
constrained
judicial
review
criminal
cases
establish
honda
motor
oberg
practice
today
jury
arbitrary
decision
acquit
defendant
charged
crime
completely
unreviewable
however
vast
difference
arbitrary
grants
freedom
arbitrary
deprivations
liberty
property
due
process
clause
nothing
say
former
whole
purpose
prevent
latter
decision
punish
tortfeasor
means
exaction
exemplary
damages
exercise
state
power
must
comply
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
common
law
practice
procedures
applied
every
state
strong
presumption
favoring
judicial
review
applied
areas
law
elementary
considerations
justice
support
conclusion
decision
committed
unreviewable
discretion
jury
judgment
reversed
case
remanded
oregon
proceedings
inconsistent
opinion
ordered
footnotes
many
early
cases
unclear
whether
case
specifically
concerns
punitive
damages
merely
ordinary
compensatory
damages
since
suggestion
different
standards
judicial
review
applied
punitive
compensatory
damages
twentieth
century
effort
made
separate
two
classes
case
see
brief
legal
historians
daniel
coquillette
et
al
amici
curiae
discussing
together
punitive
damages
personal
injury
cases
involving
damages
justice
story
grant
new
trial
clearly
accord
established
common
law
procedure
remittitur
withdrawal
new
trial
plaintiff
agreed
specific
reduction
damages
may
innovation
see
dimick
schiedt
hand
remittitur
may
better
historical
pedigree
previously
thought
see
king
watson
motion
common
pleas
set
aside
verdict
excessive
damages
recommended
compromise
hurry
agreeing
accept
pounds
discharged
rule
aspect
passion
prejudice
review
recognized
many
opinions
industries
kelco
disposal
pacific
mut
life
ins
haslip
honda
motor
oberg
scalia
concurring
txo
production
alliance
resources
slip
kennedy
concurring
slip
dissenting
amended
article
vii
oregon
constitution
provides
actions
law
value
controversy
shall
exceed
twenty
dollars
right
trial
jury
shall
preserved
fact
tried
jury
shall
otherwise
reexamined
state
unless
affirmatively
say
evidence
support
verdict
opinion
verdict
excessive
members
think
award
punitive
damages
excessive
others
awards
compensatory
punitive
damages
excessive
since
majority
opinion
power
disturb
verdict
deemed
necessary
discuss
grounds
divergent
views
van
lom
schneiderman
guaranty
right
jury
trial
suits
common
law
incorporated
bill
rights
one
first
ten
amendments
constitution
interpreted
refer
jury
trial
theretofore
known
england
federal
judges
like
english
judges
always
exercised
prerogative
granting
new
trial
verdict
clearly
weight
evidence
whether
excessive
damages
awarded
reason
state
courts
conceded
similar
powers
people
adopted
art
vii
constitution
state
union
far
advised
method
control
jury
prevail
last
reported
decision
suggest
new
trial
might
ordered
size
award
suggested
passion
prejudice
trenery
score
noting
doubtful
passion
prejudice
review
continues
available
see
also
foley
pittenger
recent
decisions
suggest
type
passion
prejudice
review
envisioned
common
honda
motor
oberg
law
former
repealed
ch
longer
available
see
tenold
weyerhaeuser
respondent
cites
support
argument
chicago
cole
holmes
case
upheld
provision
oklahoma
constitution
providing
defense
contributory
negligence
shall
left
jury
chicago
provides
little
support
respondent
case
justice
holmes
reasoning
relied
fact
state
completely
abolish
defense
contributory
negligence
case
however
different
txo
haslip
opinions
establish
abolish
limits
award
punitive
damages
case
pose
difficult
question
standard
review
constitutionally
required
although
courts
adopting
deferential
approach
use
different
verbal
formulations
may
much
practical
difference
review
focuses
passion
prejudice
gross
excessiveness
whether
verdict
great
weight
evidence
may
rough
equivalents
standard
articulated
jackson
virginia
whether
rational
trier
fact
reached
verdict
respondent
also
argues
empirical
evidence
supports
effectiveness
safeguards
points
analysis
amicus
showing
average
punitive
damage
award
products
liability
case
oregon
less
national
average
brief
trial
lawyers
public
justice
amicus
curiae
welcome
respondent
introduction
empirical
evidence
effectiveness
oregon
legal
rules
statistics
undermined
fact
oregon
average
computed
two
punitive
damage
awards
well
known
one
draw
valid
statistical
inferences
small
number
observations
empirical
evidence
fact
supports
importance
judicial
review
size
punitive
damage
awards
exhaustive
study
punitive
damages
establishes
half
punitive
damage
awards
appealed
half
appealed
resulted
reductions
reversals
punitive
damages
percent
cases
appealed
judge
found
damages
excessive
rustad
defense
punitive
damages
products
liability
testing
tort
anecdotes
empirical
data
iowa
statistics
understate
importance
judicial
review
consider
appellate
review
rather
review
trial
may
even
significant
ignore
fact
plaintiffs
often
settle
less
amount
awarded
fear
appellate
reduction
damages
see
ibid
judicial
deference
jury
verdicts
may
stronger
century
america
england
judges
power
order
new
trials
excessive
damages
contested
see
nelson
honda
motor
oberg
eighteenth
century
background
john
marshall
constitutional
jurisprudence
horwitz
transformation
american
law
nevertheless
case
concerns
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
century
american
practice
crucial
time
present
purposes
burnham
superior
county
marin
demonstrated
supra
time
fourteenth
amendment
ratified
power
judges
order
new
trials
excessive
damages
well
established
american
courts
addition
idea
jurors
find
law
well
fact
inconsistent
judicial
review
excessive
damages
see
coffin
coffin
mass
honda
motor
oberg
justice
scalia
concurring
join
opinion
full
explanation
requires
supplement
briefly
description
occurred
amendment
article
vii
oregon
constitution
oregon
courts
developed
applying
common
law
standards
limited
size
damage
awards
see
adcock
oregon
approving
trial
decision
grant
remittitur
jury
damage
award
excessive
see
also
van
lom
schneiderman
amendment
terms
eliminate
substantive
standards
altered
procedures
judicial
review
fact
tried
jury
shall
otherwise
reexamined
state
unless
affirmatively
say
evidence
support
verdict
emphasis
added
oregon
courts
appear
believe
state
law
reasonableness
limit
upon
amount
punitive
damages
subsists
enforced
process
judicial
review
van
lom
example
oregon
trouble
concluding
damage
award
excessive
see
held
honda
motor
oberg
amendment
removed
power
correct
miscarriage
justice
ordering
new
trial
opinion
establishes
right
review
eliminated
amendment
procedure
traditionally
accorded
common
law
deprivation
property
without
observing
providing
reasonable
substitute
important
traditional
procedure
enforcing
limits
upon
deprivation
violates
due
process
clause
honda
motor
oberg
justice
ginsburg
chief
justice
joins
dissenting
product
liability
cases
oregon
guides
limits
factfinder
discretion
availability
amount
punitive
damages
plaintiff
must
establish
entitlement
punitive
damages
specific
substantive
criteria
clear
convincing
evidence
factfinder
jury
decision
subject
judicial
review
extent
trial
appellate
may
nullify
verdict
reversible
error
occurred
trial
jury
improperly
inadequately
instructed
evidence
support
verdict
absent
trial
error
evidence
support
award
punitive
damages
however
oregon
constitution
article
vii
provides
properly
instructed
jury
verdict
shall
reexamined
oregon
procedures
conclude
adequate
pass
constitution
due
process
threshold
therefore
honda
motor
oberg
dissent
judgment
upsetting
oregon
disposition
case
assess
constitutionality
oregon
scheme
turn
first
recent
opinions
pacific
mut
life
ins
haslip
txo
production
alliance
resources
upheld
punitive
damage
awards
cases
indicated
due
process
imposes
outer
limit
remedies
type
significantly
neither
decision
declared
specific
procedures
substantive
criteria
essential
satisfy
due
process
haslip
expressed
concerns
unlimited
jury
discretion
unlimited
judicial
discretion
matter
fixing
punitive
damages
refused
draw
mathematical
bright
line
constitutionally
acceptable
constitutionally
unacceptable
regarding
components
constitutional
calculus
simply
referred
general
concerns
reasonableness
need
adequate
guidance
case
tried
jury
ibid
txo
majority
agreed
punitive
damage
award
may
grossly
excessive
violate
due
process
clause
slip
plurality
opinion
slip
kennedy
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
slip
dissenting
plurality
view
however
judgment
product
fair
procedures
entitled
strong
presumption
validity
presumption
persuasive
reasons
indicated
irrebuttable
virtually
id
slip
citing
haslip
supra
scalia
concurring
judgment
kennedy
concurring
honda
motor
oberg
judgment
opinion
stating
plurality
position
recalled
haslip
touchstone
concern
reasonableness
due
process
essentially
requires
slip
quoting
haslip
supra
writing
plurality
justice
stevens
explained
suggest
defendant
substantive
due
process
right
correct
determination
reasonableness
punitive
damages
award
justice
points
state
law
generally
imposes
requirement
punitive
damages
reasonable
violation
state
law
reasonableness
requirement
however
necessarily
establish
award
grossly
excessive
violate
federal
constitution
slip
citation
omitted
procedures
oregon
courts
followed
case
satisfy
due
process
limits
indicated
haslip
txo
jurors
adequately
guided
trial
instructions
honda
maintained
full
presentation
award
question
grossly
excessive
violate
federal
constitution
txo
supra
slip
honda
motor
oberg
several
mechanisms
channeled
jury
discretion
tightly
case
either
haslip
txo
first
providing
least
protection
unguided
utterly
arbitrary
jury
awards
respondent
karl
oberg
permitted
recover
amounts
specified
complaint
compensatory
damages
million
punitive
damages
see
wiebe
seely
lovejoy
specialty
hosp
advocates
life
trial
properly
instructed
jury
damage
cap
see
provision
oregon
law
appears
preclude
defendant
seeking
instruction
setting
lower
cap
evidence
trial
support
award
amount
demanded
additionally
trial
judge
relates
incorrect
maximum
amount
defendant
timely
objects
may
gain
modification
nullification
verdict
see
timber
access
industries
papers
second
oberg
allowed
introduce
evidence
regarding
honda
wealth
presented
evidence
sufficient
justify
prima
facie
claim
punitive
damages
see
also
course
trial
evidence
defendant
ability
pay
shall
admitted
honda
motor
oberg
unless
party
entitled
recover
establishes
prima
facie
right
recover
punitive
damages
evidentiary
rule
designed
lessen
risk
juries
use
verdicts
express
biases
big
businesses
ante
see
also
requiring
factfinder
take
account
total
deterrent
effect
punishment
imposed
upon
defendant
result
misconduct
third
significant
trial
instructed
jury
honda
found
liable
punitive
damages
unless
oberg
established
clear
convincing
evidence
honda
show
ed
wanton
disregard
health
safety
welfare
others
governing
product
liability
actions
see
also
except
otherwise
specifically
provided
law
claim
punitive
damages
shall
established
clear
convincing
clear
convincing
evidence
requirement
considerably
rigorous
standards
applied
alabama
haslip
west
virginia
txo
constrain
jury
discretion
limiting
punitive
damages
egregious
cases
haslip
supra
dissenting
nothing
oregon
law
appears
preclude
new
trial
order
trial
judge
informed
jury
verdict
determines
charge
adequately
explain
clear
convincing
standard
means
see
honda
motor
oberg
rule
authorizing
grant
new
trial
initiative
fourth
perhaps
important
product
liability
cases
oregon
requires
punitive
damages
awarded
based
seven
substantive
criteria
set
forth
likelihood
time
serious
harm
arise
defendant
misconduct
degree
defendant
awareness
likelihood
profitability
defendant
misconduct
duration
misconduct
concealment
attitude
conduct
defendant
upon
discovery
misconduct
financial
condition
defendant
total
deterrent
effect
punishment
imposed
upon
defendant
result
misconduct
including
limited
punitive
damage
awards
persons
situations
similar
claimant
severity
criminal
penalties
defendant
may
subjected
honda
motor
oberg
honda
motor
oberg
honda
motor
oberg
opinion
haslip
went
describe
checks
alabama
places
jury
discretion
excessiveness
review
trial
appellate
review
tests
award
specific
substantive
criteria
review
character
available
oregon
seven
factors
alabama
tests
punitive
awards
strongly
resemble
statutory
criteria
oregon
juries
instructed
apply
often
acknowledged
generally
respected
presumption
juries
follow
instructions
given
see
shannon
slip
richardson
marsh
oregon
observed
haslip
determined
alabama
procedure
whole
net
effect
violate
due
process
clause
oregon
also
observed
correctly
due
process
clause
require
subject
punitive
honda
motor
oberg
damage
awards
form
review
includes
possibility
remittitur
oregon
requires
factfinder
apply
objective
criteria
moreover
procedures
perhaps
likely
prompt
rational
fair
punitive
damage
decisions
post
hoc
checks
employed
jurisdictions
following
alabama
pattern
see
haslip
supra
dissenting
standards
applied
alabama
assist
juries
make
fair
rational
decisions
unfortunately
alabama
courts
give
se
factors
jury
instead
jury
standardless
discretion
impose
punitive
damages
whenever
whatever
amount
oregon
concluded
application
objective
criteria
ensures
sufficiently
definite
meaningful
constraints
imposed
finder
fact
oregon
also
concluded
statutory
criteria
adequately
guiding
jury
worked
ensur
resulting
award
disproportionate
defendant
conduct
need
punish
deter
ibid
honda
motor
oberg
oregon
conclusions
buttressed
availability
least
judicial
review
punitive
damage
awards
oregon
courts
ensure
evidence
support
verdict
evidence
support
jury
decision
context
evidence
statutory
prerequisites
award
punitive
damages
met
trial
appellate
courts
intervene
vacate
award
see
orcp
trial
may
grant
new
trial
evidence
insufficient
justify
verdict
law
hill
garner
judgment
notwithstanding
verdict
granted
evidence
support
verdict
state
brown
fact
decided
jury
may
reexamined
reviewing
say
affirmatively
evidence
support
jury
decision
parallel
citations
omitted
addition
punitive
damage
awards
may
set
aside
flaws
jury
instructions
see
honeywell
sterling
honda
motor
oberg
furniture
setting
aside
punitive
damage
award
prejudicial
error
instruct
jury
portion
award
used
pay
plaintiff
attorney
fees
another
portion
go
state
common
injury
fund
acknowledges
proper
jury
instructio
well
established
course
important
check
excessive
awards
ante
ii
short
oregon
enacted
legal
standards
confining
punitive
damage
awards
product
liability
cases
state
standards
judicially
enforced
means
comparatively
comprehensive
procedures
markedly
limited
review
oregon
elected
make
factfinding
supporting
evidence
produced
province
jury
cf
chicago
cole
upholding
due
process
challenge
oklahoma
constitution
assignment
contributory
negligence
assumption
risk
defenses
jury
unreviewable
decision
recognized
state
prerogative
confer
larger
powers
upon
jury
generally
prevail
minnesota
clover
leaf
creamery
stevens
dissenting
observing
allocation
functions
within
structure
state
government
ordinarily
matter
state
determine
today
invalidates
choice
largely
concludes
english
early
american
courts
generally
provided
judicial
review
size
punitive
damage
awards
see
ante
account
relevant
history
compelling
honda
motor
oberg
confident
either
clarity
early
american
common
law
import
tellingly
barely
acknowledges
large
authority
exercised
american
juries
centuries
early
years
nation
juries
usually
possessed
power
determine
law
fact
nelson
eighteenth
century
background
john
marshall
constitutional
jurisprudence
see
georgia
brailsford
dall
chief
justice
john
jay
trying
case
state
party
instructed
jury
authority
determine
law
well
fact
controversy
time
trial
jury
recognized
constitutional
right
parties
uits
common
law
amdt
assessment
uncertain
damages
regarded
generally
exclusively
jury
function
see
note
judicial
assessment
punitive
damages
seventh
amendment
politics
jury
power
see
also
revealing
notably
contracts
scope
inquiry
asks
common
law
judges
claim
power
overturn
jury
verdicts
viewed
excessive
full
fair
historical
inquiry
wider
inspect
comprehensively
comparatively
procedures
employed
trial
appeal
fix
amount
punitive
damages
evaluated
manner
oregon
scheme
affords
honda
motor
oberg
defendants
like
honda
procedural
safeguards
century
law
provided
detailed
supra
oregon
instructs
juries
decide
punitive
damage
issues
based
seven
substantive
factors
clear
convincing
evidence
standard
fourteenth
amendment
adopted
contrast
particular
procedures
deemed
necessary
circumscribe
jury
discretion
regarding
award
punitive
damages
amount
haslip
scalia
concurring
judgment
responsibility
entrusted
jury
surely
guided
instructions
kind
oregon
enacted
compare
sutherland
law
damages
committing
wrong
complained
defendant
acted
recklessly
wilfully
maliciously
design
oppress
injure
plaintiff
jury
fixing
damages
may
disregard
rule
compensation
beyond
may
punishment
defendant
protection
society
violation
personal
rights
social
order
award
additional
damages
discretion
may
deem
proper
requiring
jury
consider
inter
alia
likelihood
time
serious
harm
arise
defendant
misconduct
degree
defendant
awareness
likelihood
profitability
defendant
misconduct
duration
misconduct
concealment
furthermore
common
law
courts
reviewed
punitive
damage
verdicts
extremely
deferentially
see
day
woodworth
assessment
exemplary
punitive
vindictive
damages
always
left
discretion
jury
degree
punishment
thus
inflicted
must
depend
peculiar
circumstances
case
missouri
pacific
humes
discretion
jury
cases
honda
motor
oberg
controlled
definite
rules
barry
edmunds
actions
torts
precise
rule
law
fixes
recoverable
damages
peculiar
function
jury
determine
amount
verdict
true
century
judges
occasionally
asserted
authority
overturn
damage
awards
upon
concluding
size
award
jury
decision
must
based
partiality
passion
prejudice
ante
courts
rarely
exercised
authority
see
sedgwick
measure
damages
ed
power
sparingly
used
oregon
procedures
assure
adequate
guidance
case
tried
jury
haslip
cause
disturb
judgment
instance
honda
presses
procedural
due
process
claim
true
petition
certiorari
repeated
briefs
honda
attributed
assumption
procedural
due
process
requires
judicial
review
federal
substantive
due
process
excessiveness
challenges
size
award
pet
cert
emphasis
original
assertion
regarding
state
law
excessiveness
challenges
extraordinary
never
held
due
process
clause
requires
state
courts
police
jury
factfindings
ensure
conformity
state
law
see
chicago
cole
earlier
observed
see
supra
plurality
opinion
txo
disavowed
suggestion
defendant
federal
due
process
right
correct
determination
state
law
reasonableness
punitive
damages
award
slip
honda
motor
oberg
honda
asserted
certiorari
petition
surely
due
process
mention
supremacy
clause
principles
requires
minimum
state
courts
entertain
pass
federal
law
contention
particular
punitive
verdict
grossly
excessive
violate
substantive
due
process
oregon
refusal
provide
even
limited
form
review
particularly
indefensible
pet
cert
may
oregon
procedures
guide
juries
well
grossly
excessive
verdict
honda
projects
certiorari
petition
never
materializes
cf
supra
present
awards
punitive
damages
oregon
reported
two
products
liability
cases
including
one
however
future
case
plea
plausibly
made
particular
punitive
damage
award
merely
excessive
grossly
excessive
violate
federal
constitution
txo
slip
oregon
judiciary
nevertheless
insists
powerless
consider
plea
might
cause
grant
review
cf
testa
katt
ruling
obligation
state
honda
motor
oberg
courts
enforce
federal
law
case
us
today
honda
maintain
otherwise
see
supra
size
award
honda
appear
line
awards
upheld
haslip
txo
summarize
oregon
procedures
adequately
guide
jury
charged
responsibility
determine
plaintiff
qualification
amount
punitive
damages
account
deny
defendants
procedural
due
process
oregon
correctly
refused
rule
award
punitive
damages
comport
requirements
due
process
clause
always
must
subject
form
appellate
review
excessiveness
emphasis
added
verdict
particular
case
considered
light
decisions
haslip
txo
hardly
appears
grossly
excessive
violate
substantive
component
due
process
clause
txo
slip
accordingly
procedural
directive
state
neither
necessary
proper
oregon
refused
enforce
federal
law
affirm
judgment
article
vii
oregon
constitution
reads
actions
law
value
controversy
shall
exceed
right
trial
jury
shall
preserved
fact
tried
jury
shall
otherwise
reexamined
state
unless
affirmatively
say
evidence
support
verdict
oregon
noted
procedural
due
process
context
award
punitive
damages
relates
requirement
procedure
employed
making
award
fundamentally
fair
substantive
limit
declared
relates
size
award
contrary
suggestion
ante
based
tenold
weyerhaeuser
decision
intermediate
appellate
defendant
appear
objected
trial
instructions
inaccurate
incomplete
insufficient
failure
inform
jury
concerning
cap
noneconomic
damages
haslip
jury
told
award
punitive
damages
reasonably
satisfied
evidence
defendant
committed
fraud
pacific
mut
life
ins
haslip
txo
jury
instructed
apply
preponderance
evidence
standard
see
txo
production
alliance
resources
slip
trial
instructed
jury
punitive
damages
found
plaintiff
entitled
general
damages
must
consider
whether
award
punitive
damages
punitive
damages
may
awarded
plaintiff
addition
general
damages
punish
wrongdoers
discourage
wanton
misconduct
order
plaintiff
recover
punitive
damages
defendant
plaintiff
must
prove
clear
convincing
evidence
defendant
shown
wanton
disregard
health
safety
welfare
others
decide
issue
defendant
may
award
punitive
damages
although
required
honda
motor
oberg
punitive
damages
discretionary
exercise
discretion
shall
consider
evidence
following
first
likelihood
time
sale
atv
serious
harm
arise
defendants
misconduct
number
two
degree
defendants
awareness
likelihood
number
three
duration
misconduct
number
four
attitude
conduct
defendant
upon
notice
alleged
condition
vehicle
number
five
financial
condition
defendant
trial
judge
haslip
instructed
jury
find
fraud
perpetrated
addition
compensatory
damages
may
discretion
use
word
discretion
say
even
find
fraud
may
law
says
may
award
amount
money
known
punitive
damages
amount
money
awarded
plaintiff
compensate
plaintiff
injury
punish
defendant
punitive
means
punish
also
called
exemplary
damages
means
make
example
feel
feel
reasonably
satisfied
evidence
plaintiff
ha
fraud
perpetrated
upon
direct
result
injured
addition
compensatory
damages
may
discretion
award
punitive
damages
honda
motor
oberg
purpose
awarding
punitive
exemplary
damages
allow
money
recovery
plaintiffs
way
punishment
defendant
added
purpose
protecting
public
deterring
defendant
others
wrong
future
imposition
punitive
damages
entirely
discretionary
jury
means
award
unless
jury
feels
award
punitive
damages
fixing
amount
must
take
consideration
character
degree
wrong
shown
evidence
necessity
preventing
similar
wrong
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
jury
instruction
txo
read
addition
actual
compensatory
damages
law
permits
jury
certain
circumstances
make
award
punitive
damages
order
punish
wrongdoer
misconduct
serve
example
warning
others
engage
conduct
provide
additional
compensation
conduct
injured
parties
subjected
find
preponderance
evidence
txo
production
guilty
wanton
wilful
malicious
reckless
conduct
shows
indifference
right
others
may
make
award
punitive
damages
case
assessing
punitive
damages
take
consideration
circumstances
surrounding
particular
occurrence
including
nature
wrongdoing
extent
harm
inflicted
intent
party
committing
act
wealth
perpetrator
well
mitigating
circumstances
may
operate
reduce
amount
damages
object
punishment
deter
txo
production
others
committing
like
offenses
future
therefore
law
recognizes
fact
deter
conduct
may
require
larger
fine
upon
one
large
means
upon
one
ordinary
means
similar
circumstances
slip
alabama
factors
whether
reasonable
relationship
punitive
damages
award
harm
likely
result
defendant
conduct
well
harm
actually
occurred
degree
reprehensibility
defendant
conduct
duration
conduct
defendant
awareness
concealment
existence
frequency
similar
past
conduct
profitability
defendant
wrongful
conduct
desirability
removing
profit
defendant
also
sustain
loss
financial
position
defendant
costs
litigation
imposition
criminal
sanctions
defendant
conduct
taken
mitigation
existence
civil
awards
defendant
conduct
also
taken
mitigation
citing
green
oil
hornsby
central
alabama
elec
cooperative
tapley
indeed
compatibility
remittitur
seventh
amendment
settled
dimick
schiedt
oregon
juries
reported
decisions
indicate
rarely
award
punitive
damages
present
awards
punitive
damages
reported
two
product
liability
cases
involving
oregon
law
including
one
see
brief
trial
lawyers
public
justice
amicus
curiae
punitive
award
case
times
amount
compensatory
damages
times
plaintiff
expenses
amount
far
distant
award
upheld
haslip
times
amount
compensatory
damages
times
plaintiff
expenses
see
million
award
sustained
txo
contrast
times
greater
actual
damages
slip
sparf
jury
power
decide
law
conclusively
rejected
federal
courts
see
riggs
constitutionalizing
punitive
damages
limits
due
process
ohio
inquiry
order
akin
one
made
haslip
see
supra
decision
van
lom
schneiderman
oregon
merely
held
lacked
authority
order
new
trial
even
though
award
damages
excessive
state
law
see
ante
scalia
concurring
federal
limit
yet
recognized
van
lom
occasion
consider
obligation
check
jury
verdicts
deemed
excessive
federal
law
page