Punitive Damages National Study Shows Juries and Judges Award at Almost Identical Rates

According to a New York Times article today, a recent study found that judges award punitive damages in civil cases about as often as juries, and in comparable amounts. The study of nearly 9,000 trials in New York, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Dallas, and elsewhere challenges critics of the civil justice system who claim that juries tend to grant excessively large punitive damages awards.

The study, to be published in March in the Cornell Law Review, was conducted by two Cornell professors and three analysts from the National Center for State Courts, an independent research group, and shows that judges and juries each awarded punitive damages in about 4% of the cases won by plaintiffs. When judges or juries awarded punitive damages, they did so in about the same proportion to compensatory damages. The study also found that judges awarded punitive damages more frequently than juries in the following types of cases:

• Products liability cases (8.3% for judges vs. 7.1% for juries - excludes asbestos)
• Individual vs. corporation (6.7% for judges vs. 4.7% for juries)
• Individual vs. individual (5.3 % for judges vs. 3.5% for juries)

The Times article quotes the researchers arguing that their study contradicts arguments that "out-of-control" juries undermine the legal system and marketplace by awarding outrageous punitive damages.

The Times article can be found at the following website: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/06/national/06LEGA.html