Tuesday, February 20, 2007

More on Williams

Fortune's Legal Pad has a good look at it.  The lede:

Whenever the U.S. Supreme Court sets aside a punitive damages award on constitutional grounds, I suppose it must be seen as a victory for business. Still, while the Court's 5-4 ruling today in Philip Morris v. Williams definitely qualifies--the Court set aside a $79.5 million punitive damage award that an Oregon state jury had tried to award the widow of one individual smoker--it's a narrow ruling and, frankly, a confusing one.

I've read it another couple of times since this morning and continue to find it similarly confusing.  Or maybe "confusing" isn't the right word -- how about "prone to causing confusion and difficult to imagine trial courts finding helpful"?  That's not bad, though it doesn't have much rhythm to it.

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/tortsprof/2007/02/more_on_william.html

Damages | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00d8353ef27653ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference More on Williams:

Comments

Post a comment