Variability in punitive damages: Empirically assessing Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker Academic Article uri icon

Overview

MeSH Major

  • Antibodies, Monoclonal
  • Antineoplastic Agents
  • Protein Kinase Inhibitors
  • Receptor, Epidermal Growth Factor
  • Skin Neoplasms

abstract

  • Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker acknowledged that empirical studies undercut criticism of punitive damages. Paradoxically, the Court simultaneously expressed concern about jury predictability based on a high and variable punitive-compensatory ratio published in an article by the present authors. The Court reduced the $2.5 billion Exxon Valdez punitive award to $500 million and stated: "the constitutional outer limit may well be 1:1."1Our empirical findings do not support the unpredictability concern or widely applying the limiting ratio. The high and variable ratio is an artifact of not accounting for the key variable that explains punitive awards the compensatory award. (JEL: K 00, K 13, K 32, K 41). © 2010 Mohr Siebeck.

publication date

  • March 2010

Research

keywords

  • Academic Article

Identity

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1628/093245610790711555

Additional Document Info

start page

  • 5

end page

  • 26

volume

  • 166

number

  • 1