Punitive damages: An economic analysis

Harvard Law Review

Volumn 112, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 870-

  Mitchell Polinsky, A ^a   Shavell, Steven ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0346366197     PISSN: 0017811X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (1)

1. The United States Supreme Court's struggle to develop coherent principles in this area is exemplified by the skeptical views expressed by various Justices on the rationality of punitive damages. Most recently, in BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, 116 S. Ct. 1589 (1996), Justice Scalia, in a pointed dissent, described the Court's guideposts for assessing punitive damages as "provid[ing] no real guidance at all." Id. at 1613 (Scalia, J., dissenting); see also TXO Prod. Corp.