Ford Motor Co. v. Stubblefield

Punitive Damages

American law recognizes the social utility of punitive (sometimes called exemplary) damages as a highly effective method of discouraging deplorable behavior. Some countries do not permit them at all on the theory that the power to “punish” wrongdoers resides exclusively with the government under the
criminal law. Japan is one such country, and Japanese courts refuse to enforce foreign judicial awards for punitive damages on the grounds that they violate Japanese public policy.

Punitive damages require more than mere negligence, but if a successful plaintiff can make a case for punitive damages, the potential recovery can be huge. Juries are not free, however, to award any amount they wish. In BMW v. Gore, 517 U.S. 559 (1996), the U.S. Supreme Court struck down an award of punitive damages for being “grossly excessive” under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court has used a three-pronged analysis in determining whether an award is grossly excessive: “(1) the degree of reprehensibility of the defendant's misconduct; (2) the disparity between the actual or potential harm suffered by the plaintiff and the punitive damages

award; and (3) the difference between the punitive damages awarded by the jury and the civil penalties authorized or imposed in comparable cases.” Of the three factors, the first is clearly the most significant.

The following case deals with punitive damages resulting from a defective automobile design. Ford designed, manufactured, and sold a car in the 1970s called the Pinto. The gas tank of the Pinto was located in the rear of the car and was not properly reinforced against a rear end impact. When the car was struck from behind, even at relatively slow speeds, the gas tank would frequently burst into flames turning the car into an inferno. A similar gas tank design was used in Ford's Mustang II. As you read the case, ask whether you think the punitive damage award would pass the BMW v. Gore test if it were to come up today.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

171 Ga. App. 331

67758

1984-06-13

This book, and all H2O books, are Creative Commons licensed for sharing and re-use with the exception of certain excerpts. Any excerpts from the Restatements of the Law, Principles of the Law, and the Model Penal Code are copyright by The American Law Institute. Excerpts are reproduced with permission, not as part of a Creative Commons license.