Issue: Under Texas law, does the proper amount of punitive damages have a relation to a plaintiff’s need for compensation?
|Area of Law:||Litigation & Procedure|
|Keywords:||Punitive damages; Need for compensation; Punishment and deterrence|
|Cited Cases:||972 S.W.2d 35; 879 S.W.2d 10|
|Cited Statutes:||Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 41.001(5)|
Texas law makes clear that the purpose of punitive damages is not to compensate a plaintiff for her loss, but rather punitive damages ARE levied for the public purpose of punishment and deterrence. See Transp. Ins. Co. v. Moriel, 879 S.W.2d 10, 17 (Tex. 1994); Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 41.001(5) (1997) (defining exemplary damages as damages awarded as a penalty or by way of punishment). In other words, rather than compensating the injured party, exemplary damages serve the purposes of punishing the liable party and protecting the public. Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corp. v. Malone, 972 S.W.2d 35, 39-40 (Tex. 1998). Accord Pac. Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Haslip, 499 U.S.1 (1991); Maxey v. Freightliner Corp., 665 F.2d 1367 (5th Cir. 1982).