How Reprehensible Was Phillip Morris?
Category: In Your Face Reprehensibility, according to the United States Supreme Court, is the primary criterion for punitive damages. In our lifetimes can there be any more reprehensible behavior by corporations than the conduct of cigarette manufacturers? We are soon going to hear an argument before the Supreme Court that juries need to be on shorter leashes when considering punitive damages. It will be made in a room where smoking is banned for health reasons by a company (Phillip Morris) that has fraudulently marketed its cancer-causing products for decades. Everyone will be very proper and academic. It will be countered by arguments, such as those contained in an amicus brief filed by a Duke University law professor, Neil Vidmar. Juries Behave ‘Rationally’ When Making Punitive Damage Awards, Law Professor Says Juries behave rationally and deliberately when they make large punitive damage awards, says Duke University law professor Neil Vidmar. Vidmar, who conducts empirical studies
