Punitive damages are a special type of compensation that may be awarded in some California personal injury cases. Unlike damages intended to reimburse an injured person for losses, punitive damages are designed to punish particularly wrongful conduct and discourage similar behavior.
California law sets a high standard for recovering punitive damages. They are not available in every personal injury case, even when another party is clearly responsible for causing an accident or injury.
How Are Punitive Damages Different From Compensatory Damages?
Most damages awarded in personal injury cases are compensatory damages. Their purpose is to compensate an injured person for the financial and personal consequences of an accident.
Compensatory damages are referred to as economic damages and non-economic damages.
These may include amounts for:
- Medical expenses
- Lost wages and reduced earning capacity
- Rehabilitation expenses
- Pain and suffering
- Emotional distress
- Loss of enjoyment of life
Punitive damages serve a different purpose. Rather than compensating the plaintiff for a particular loss, they are meant to punish a defendant and deter similar misconduct.
Because of that purpose, California law requires more than proof that the defendant was simply careless.
When Can Punitive Damages Be Awarded in California?
Under California Civil Code Section 3294, punitive damages may be available in a case involving an obligation not arising from a contract when the plaintiff proves by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant acted with oppression, fraud, or malice.
This standard is higher than the standard generally used to establish negligence in a personal injury case. An ordinary mistake or moment of carelessness will not automatically support an award of punitive damages.
Instead, the defendant’s actions must satisfy one of the specific standards established by California law.
What Do Malice, Oppression, and Fraud Mean?
California Civil Code Section 3294 defines each of the three grounds for punitive damages.
Malice
Malice can involve conduct intended to injure another person. It can also involve despicable conduct carried out with a willful and conscious disregard for another person’s rights or safety.
Intent to cause an injury is therefore not required in every case involving alleged malice. However, the conduct must generally involve something substantially more serious than ordinary negligence.
Oppression
Oppression means despicable conduct that subjects another person to cruel and unjust hardship while consciously disregarding that person’s rights.
Whether conduct reaches this level depends on the facts and evidence presented in the case.
Fraud
Fraud for purposes of punitive damages involves intentional misrepresentation, deceit, or concealment of a material fact that the defendant knows about. The defendant must act with the intention of depriving someone of property or legal rights or otherwise causing injury.
This requirement distinguishes intentional fraud from an innocent mistake or misunderstanding.
How Do You Prove Punitive Damages in California?
A plaintiff seeking punitive damages must establish the required misconduct by clear and convincing evidence. This is a higher burden than the usual preponderance-of-the-evidence standard that applies to many issues in civil cases.
As a result, evidence showing that the defendant caused an accident may not be enough by itself. The plaintiff must also present evidence supporting a finding of malice, oppression, or fraud.
California Courts notes that exemplary, or punitive, damages can be difficult to prove because this additional showing is required.
Evidence relevant to a punitive damages claim will depend on the circumstances. Records, communications, witness testimony, company policies, prior conduct, and other evidence may become important when evaluating the defendant’s state of mind and actions.
Can a Company Be Required to Pay Punitive Damages?
Punitive damages can sometimes be awarded against an employer or corporation, but California imposes additional requirements.
An employer generally is not responsible for punitive damages based solely on an employee’s conduct. Under Civil Code Section 3294, liability may require evidence that the employer knew in advance that an employee was unfit and acted with conscious disregard, authorized or ratified the misconduct, or was itself guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice.
For a corporation, the required advance knowledge, authorization, ratification, or wrongful conduct generally must involve an officer, director, or managing agent.
These rules can make punitive damages claims against businesses more complicated than claims against individual defendants.
How Are Punitive Damages Calculated in California?
There is no simple formula for determining an appropriate punitive damages award. The amount must serve the purposes of punishment and deterrence without being constitutionally excessive. Courts may therefore review punitive damages awards based on the facts and circumstances of each case.
A defendant’s financial resources can be relevant because an amount that meaningfully deters one defendant may have a very different effect on another.
California law also restricts when a plaintiff may obtain pretrial discovery concerning a defendant’s profits or financial condition. A court order is generally required before this information can be obtained through pretrial discovery for purposes of punitive damages.
Are Punitive Damages Available in Every California Personal Injury Case?
No. Punitive damages are an additional remedy reserved for cases involving conduct that meets California’s heightened legal standard.
Many valid personal injury claims involve negligence but do not involve oppression, fraud, or malice. Those plaintiffs may still pursue compensatory damages even when punitive damages are unavailable.
Additionally, punitive damages are generally not available for claims against public entities. California Government Code Section 818 states that a public entity is not liable for punitive damages under Civil Code Section 3294 or other damages imposed primarily to punish the defendant.
Whether punitive damages may be appropriate depends on the defendant’s actions, available evidence, and other facts surrounding the injury.
Contact the Personal Injury Lawyers at J. Hartley Law Personal Injury Lawyers for a Free Consultation
If you were injured because of another party’s wrongful conduct in El Segundo, California, J. Hartley Law Personal Injury Lawyers can review your case and explain the types of compensation that may be available.
Our attorneys have 20 years of combined experience and have recovered tens of millions of dollars in compensation for accident victims. Contact J. Hartley Law Personal Injury Lawyers today to schedule a free consultation with an El Segundo personal injury lawyer.