Alabama Insurance

The Supreme Court today reiterates that there is not a judgement about two weeks ago, permanently whether punitive damages against the Constitution is the guarantor of a trial of law.

In previous cases in Alabama, the Court of Justice ruled 7 to 1, a price of $ 840000 in punitive damages in a case of insurance fraud is not a violation of the insurance company ’s rights of due process.

But today, fallow land Justices punitive damage awards in seven cases in which the Court had latent action for months, while Alabama has been the case.

Cases pending from five state and federal courts, maintain the prices of punitive damages of $ 400000 to $ 3 million. In all cases, the command of the Justices of the lower courts, prices in light of the decision in the case of Alabama, Pacific Mutual v. Haslip.

Implicites of action in the Court today was the suggestion that even if the award of damages Alabama constitutional norms, some of these other maybe not. The action, it is possible, even probable that the cases reach the Supreme Court again.

At the same time, refused the revision of Justices in two other cases, punitive damages. These two events, as the Tribunal decided two weeks ago, were appeals to the Supreme Court of Alabama.

Both cases were Alabama General American Life Insurance Co. V. Simmons, No. 90-73, an appeal against an award of $ 600000, and Massachusetts Mutual Life v. Collins, No. 90-244, an appeal against an award of $ 750000. Both cases involved insurance fraud.

In its ruling two weeks ago, the Court said the jury instructions and the Appellate Body planned revision in Alabama were sufficient to ensure that ownership of a defendant are not taken, in the form punitive damages, without a trial of law. While the Court found constitutionally adequate procedures Alabama, he did not say whether the procedures were constitutionally required.

It is now a justice in other countries to compare their procedures for the Supreme Court to approve and decide whether they provide adequate protection against the fair trial.

“It is clear that the Supreme Court so that this issue is not so closed, and it is also clear that the Court do not want something to do, now more fair,” said Andrew L. Frey, a lawyer who has handled here punitive damages several cases by the Court of Auditors. “They are always the issue, ducking so they see that national courts have to say.”

Mr. Frey was one of the lawyers Hare Krishna movement through a medium of $ 3 million punitive damages prize won the California State courts by a former trailers and his mother. The complaint, International Society for Krishna Consciousness against George, No. 89-1399, in part states that the award threaten the movement of constitutional rights to free exercise of religion.

The Supreme Court of Justice in California, this distinction as against $ 2 million damage award Strafaktion of the Church of Scientology, won by an old trailer. Scientologists issues relating to freedom of religion in Church of Scientology v. Wollersheim, No. 89-1361.

The Court also has other punitive damage awards available today: A $ 400000 award against a Commodity Broker, was adopted by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, St. Louis (Clayton Brokerage against the Jordan, No. 88-1483); Price $ 500000 in a case of insurance, followed by the USA Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans (v. Eichenseer Reserve Life, No. 89-1303); $ 1.3 million against an allocation of Georgia Landkreis hospital Confirmed by the Georgia Supreme Court (Hospital Authority of Gwinnett County v. Jones, No. 89-1315) and a grant of $ 2 million in commercial real estate litigation, followed by the California Court of Appeal (v. Pacific Lighting Corp. MGW, Inc. No. 90-626) and an award of $ 500000 in one case, business secrets of the United States Court of Appeals for the 10 Circuit, Denver (Portec, Inc. v. The Post Office).