SACRAMENTO - Two bills sponsored by the Civil Justice Association of California (AB 2582 - Ackerman and SB 2056 - Morrow) are set to be heard in the Assembly and Senate Judiciary committees on Tuesday, May 9. These bills would bring much needed, targeted reforms to California's uncontrolled punitive damage award system.

Assembly Bill 2582 (Ackerman) would allow economic and pain and suffering damages in a negligence lawsuit, but not punitive damages, in cases where a defendant company had designed and produced the product involved in compliance with government standards.

"It is ridiculous to claim that a manufacturer who makes a product that conforms to government standards can be accused of malice and oppression, which is what punitive damages is supposed to punish," commented John H. Sullivan, CJAC President.

Senate Bill 2056 (Morrow) would prohibit punitive damage awards in cases when punitive damages have already been awarded for the same activity in an earlier case.

"The civil law system has none of the protections for defendants that a criminal defendant gets. This 'legal product defect' was pointed out long ago by the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell who wrote that 'The grant of standardless discretion to punish has no parallel in our system of justice . . . It is long past time to bring the law of punitive damages into conformity with our notions of just punishment, and with the tradition of other nations that also protect their citizens against arbitrary deprivations,'" Sullivan said.

The huge contingency fee potential from a punitive damage verdict has made punitive damage claims almost routine. A 1996 CJAC study in four major counties found that nearly a third of all contract and tort cases involved demands for punitive damages.

There has been a steady trend among states toward restricting punitive damages. Fifteen states now have a variety of caps on these damages. Seven states either do not allow punitive damages at all or greatly restrict their use.