 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Werremeyer v. K.C. Auto Salvage6/30/2003
nsatory damages and $4000 in punitive damages. Id. at 546. This court described the defendant's actions as "outrageous" and as evincing "reckless indifference" to the rights of others. In Henderson, the defendant had drunk a great deal of alcohol, got in a car and drove around 100 miles per hour, weaved in and out of traffic, passed other vehicles, and crossed the highway median, before colliding with another car, killing two parents and their baby. 68 S.W.3d at 463.
That a punitive damage award is valid, in part, because of the extreme reprehensibility of the defendant's conduct, does not mean that a defendant's conduct must be extremely reprehensible to support a punitive damage award. Reprehensible conduct, whether extreme or not, is also just one factor in evaluating the propriety of punitive damage awards. See supra.
While this court should look to other cases for guidance in reviewing punitive damage awards, they are often unhelpful because each punitive damage case is unique. Barnett, 963 S.W.2d at 661. The cases cited by the Werremeyers --DeLong v. Hilltop Lincoln-Mercury, Inc., 812 S.W.2d 834 (Mo. App. 1991), and Grabinski v. Blue Springs Ford Sales, Inc., 203 F.3d 1024 (8th Cir. 2000) (applying Missouri law) --are more factually similar than Copart's and support the trial court's award. In DeLong, the defendant was found liable of intentionally misrepresenting that the car the defendant sold to the plaintiff was a local trade-in. 812 S.W.2d at 840. This court affirmed the trial court's award of $3000 in actual and $75,000 in punitive damages. Id. at 836-37, 841. A misrepresentation about whether one has clean title is, if anything, more material and hence more reprehensible than misrepresentation as to whether a car was an individual trade in, as opposed to a dealer trade in. In Grabinski, a misrepresentation case involving the Missouri Merchandising Practice Act, see sections 407.010-.025, section 407.120, RSMo. (1994), the Eighth Circuit affirmed an award of $100,000 in punitives, which is close to the $125,000 in remitted punitives awarded here.
The factors relevant in the reprehensibility calculus, moreover, do not clearly favor Copart. The harm here was economic, not physical; however, Copart' s misrepresentation led the Werremeyers to purchase a car that had been fabricated, presumably by a "chop shop," out of two different vehicles. Such a car, if only because the fabrication was not regulated, posed a danger to both the Werremeyers and to the public. Arguably Copart's misrepresentation, on two different occasions, evinced a reckless disregard for the safety of others. While there is no specific evidence that the Werremeyers are financially vulnerable, they are individual consumers. They are thus less able --and less likely --; to initiate suits than many corporate or public defendants. Another name for deceit is fraudulent (or intentional) misrepresentation, Black's Law Dictionary 413 (7th ed. 1999), so the Werremeyers' harm was "the result of intentional malice, trickery, or deceit," not a mere accident. There is quite a difference between not disclosing a material fact because of a good faith belief that disclosure is not required and a "deliberate false statement." BMW, 517 U.S. at 579. Insofar as this factor does not strongly support the punitive damage award against Copart, the difficulty of detecting such misrepresentations as Copart's more than compensates. See infra.
The second Gore factor, the disparity between the actual or potential harm suffered by the plaintiff and punitive damage award, does not clearly favor Copart, either. The ratio between punitive and actual damages in this case was 13.9. (The remitted punitive damages against Copart we
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Missouri Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE
|