Supreme Court Cuts Exxon Valdez Punitive Damages
Before I call it an evening, I wanted to comment on the Exxon-Valdez Supreme Court judgment. However, since others have done a grand job, I'll only add a few lines.
According to the NYTimes: "The Supreme Court on Wednesday reduced what had once been a $5 billion punitive damages award against ExxonMobil to about $500 million. The ruling essentially concluded a legal saga that started when the Exxon Valdez, a supertanker, dumped 11 million gallons of crude oil into the Prince William Sound in Alaska in 1989.
"Justice David H. Souter, writing for the majority in the 5-to-3 decision, said a ratio between the two sorts of damages of no more than one-to-one was generally appropriate, at least in maritime cases. Since Exxon has paid about $507 million to compensate more than 32,000 Native Alaskans, landowners and commercial fishermen, Justice Souter said, it should have to pay no more than that amount in punitive damages.
"That works out to $15,000 for each plaintiff for compensation and $15,000 more as punitive damages."
Souter's writing for the majority and his vote surprised me. Besides, $30,000 per plaintiff doesn't exactly make each a millionaire and seems about right for years of suffering and losing their livelihoods. In addition, because of Exxon, it's been in the court system so long that many of the plaintiffs have died.
According to the NYTimes: "The Supreme Court on Wednesday reduced what had once been a $5 billion punitive damages award against ExxonMobil to about $500 million. The ruling essentially concluded a legal saga that started when the Exxon Valdez, a supertanker, dumped 11 million gallons of crude oil into the Prince William Sound in Alaska in 1989.
"Justice David H. Souter, writing for the majority in the 5-to-3 decision, said a ratio between the two sorts of damages of no more than one-to-one was generally appropriate, at least in maritime cases. Since Exxon has paid about $507 million to compensate more than 32,000 Native Alaskans, landowners and commercial fishermen, Justice Souter said, it should have to pay no more than that amount in punitive damages.
"That works out to $15,000 for each plaintiff for compensation and $15,000 more as punitive damages."
Souter's writing for the majority and his vote surprised me. Besides, $30,000 per plaintiff doesn't exactly make each a millionaire and seems about right for years of suffering and losing their livelihoods. In addition, because of Exxon, it's been in the court system so long that many of the plaintiffs have died.
"Justice Souter was a little self-conscious in presenting a numerical ratio as a rule of law."
Comments