Constitutional challenges have been rejected under due process, taking, jury trial, open courts and various other state constitutional provisions. It makes sense. While compensatory damages might present a closer question (depending on issues such as retroactivity), there’s simply no constitutional right for one private party to demand that another private party be punished.

Especially not when the putative purpose of the damages, to inflict financial distress on the target, has been obviated by an intervening bankruptcy.

No constitutional right to punitive damages, cont’d is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

April 11 roundup is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Chrysler’s White-House-assisted bankruptcy is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

April 12 roundup is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

“As I am sure you can appreciate from your years of work with the board, control of use of a mark by enthusiastic students and parents is quite simply not practical, and I know the school and board would not want to be in the position of censoring student expression associated with the design,” wrote Judith Powell, an attorney for Chrysler.

(& welcome The Truth About Cars readers)

High school agrees to halt Chrysler Rams logo use is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

P.S. Commenter VMS: “Sometimes corporations need to use their marketing brains rather than their legal muscle…. If Walter Chrysler were still around, he would have instructed his lawyers to license the mark to the team at minimal cost.”

Update: High school yields and a Chrysler lawyer explains the company’s rationale for not doing a license.

Florida school team swipes Chrysler’s “Rams” logo is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

Because taxpayers and creditors haven’t given enough is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

The Chrysler bankruptcy threw a wrench into the appellate process. Given the number of unsecured (and secured!) creditors who were taking a haircut on what Chrysler owed them, and the weakness of the case, one would expect the claim to be extinguished. But Chrysler unilaterally (and almost certainly politically) decided not to extinguish product-liability lawsuits against it, and the Mraz case has settled for $24 million. (Amanda Bronstad, “Chrysler bankruptcy judge approves $24 million personal injury settlement”, National Law Journal, Sep. 25). Of course, the likely $8-$10 million attorneys’ fee in this case is being funded by taxpayers’ bailout money.

Update on Mraz v. Chrysler is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

“Majority of House supports bill to reverse dealer closings” is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system

As readers of Overlawyered know, the Tennessee Supreme Court reinstated $13.3 million of punitive damages over a good-faith dispute over a van’s seat back design (in an accident caused by a drunk driver), giving no credit to the fact that the design in question was safer than federal safety standards, or to Exxon Shipping’s suggestion that punitive damages greater than a 1:1 ratio were possibly constitutionally inappropriate where compensatory damages were substantial and the defendant’s actions were not intentional or done for profit. As I described the case back then:

In 2001, Louis Stockell, driving his pickup at 70 mph, twice the speed limit, rear-ended a Chrysler minivan. Physics being what they are, the front passenger seat in the van collapsed backwards and the passenger’s head struck and fatally injured 8-month old Joshua Flax. The rest of the family walked away from the horrific accident. Plaintiffs’ attorney Jim Butler argued that Chrysler, which already designed its seats above federal standards, should be punished for not making the seats stronger — never mind that a stronger and stiffer seat would result in more injuries from other kinds of crashes because it wouldn’t absorb any energy from the crash. (Rear-end collisions are responsible for only 3% of auto fatalities.) Apparently car companies are expected to anticipate which type of crash a particular vehicle will encounter, and design accordingly.

(h/t Cutting)

SCOTUS refuses to review Flax punitive damages is a post from Overlawyered - Chronicling the high cost of our legal system