Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
It is often the case that juries are only too eager to award punitive damages that are excessively large when compared to the potential damages or actual damage done. In 1996, the Supreme Court made an effort in BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, 517 U.S. 559, to curb the effects of this behavior by imposing territorial limitations on the conduct that juries may consider when calculating the size of punitive damages. Specifically, the Court held that states could not consider out-of-state conduct in punitive damages calculations when such conduct was legal in other states. The BMW decision was based on principles of state sovereignty, comity, federalism, and the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.
Recently, a potentially landmark opinion, White v. Ford Motor Co., 2 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11 (9th Cir. 2002), came down from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. White applies the policies underlying the BMW decision to extend the territorial limitation on punitive damages. The White court held that, in addition to being barred from considering out-of-state conduct when such conduct is legal in other states, a state is barred from considering extraterritorial conduct even when such conduct is illegal in other states. A petition for rehearing the White case is currently pending in the Ninth Circuit. Depending upon whether rehearing is granted and, if so, how the rehearing is decided, the decision in White to mandate jury instructions on extraterritorial limitations could become settled Ninth Circuit law.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.