Reconstructing Malice in the Law of Punitive Damages
Punitive damages present two related puzzles. One concerns their object. If they are punitive, their object is to punish tortfeasors. If they are damages, their object is to compensate tort victims. If they are both, as the Supreme Court has recently stated, the problem is to reconcile these different objects in applying them. A second puzzle involves their subject. Punitive damages are awarded for egregious wrongdoing. But the nature of that egregiousness is nebulous and contested, implicating many poorly understood terms. The two puzzles are connected, because the subject of punitive damages will inform their object. Once we know the type of wrongfulness that punitive damages deal with, we can understand better whether and how they are punishing, compensating, or both. This Article reconstructs one of punitive damages’ central subjects: malice. In so doing, it clarifies one key object of punitive damages: to offer redress to a victim of cruelty. Malice is a ubiquitous textual element in the state law of punitive damages. But there has been little scholarly commentary about what malice means for punitive damages. Drawing from the common history of tort and criminal law, this Article identifies two core meanings of malice: a desire or motive to do wrong, and a disposition of callous indifference to the wrong inflicted. Though distinct, these meanings broadly coalesce in the concept of cruelty. The Article argues that this reconstructed account of the wrong of malice represents a powerful justification for awarding punitive damages. Malice as cruelty as a justification for punitive damages also fits within a broader view of tort law as redress for specific private wrongs. But malice as a subject of punitive damages clarifies and enriches this account of their object. A victim of a tort done with malice, and who is aware of it, has been wronged more gravely than a victim of a tort done without malice and is therefore entitled to greater redress
Year of publication: |
[2021]
|
---|---|
Authors: | DeGirolami, Marc O. |
Publisher: |
[S.l.] : SSRN |
Subject: | Haftung | Liability | Rechtsökonomik | Economic analysis of law | Strafe | Punishment | Theorie | Theory | Schuldrecht | Law of obligations |
Saved in:
freely available
Extent: | 1 Online-Ressource (48 p) |
---|---|
Type of publication: | Book / Working Paper |
Language: | English |
Notes: | In: 14 Journal of Tort Law Nach Informationen von SSRN wurde die ursprüngliche Fassung des Dokuments December 23, 2020 erstellt |
Source: | ECONIS - Online Catalogue of the ZBW |
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10013251809
Saved in favorites
Similar items by subject
-
Polinsky, Alan Mitchell, (1997)
-
Punitive damages : an economic analysis
Polinsky, Alan Mitchell, (1997)
-
An Empirical Study of Punitive Damages
Goudkamp, James, (2017)
- More ...
Similar items by person
-
The New Religious Prisons and Their Retributivist Commitments
DeGirolami, Marc O., (2007)
- More ...