|
Arizona Legal Research - Malpractice punitive damages.
Arizona is in the minority on the following legal
malpractice - punitive damages point.
In most states lost punitive damages are not recoverable in a subsequent
legal malpractice case. Leading proponents of this view are Illinois,
California, and New York. See See Ferguson v. Lieff, Cabraser,
Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, 30 Cal. 4th 1037, 69 P.3d 965 (2003); Summerville
v. Lipsig, 270 A.D. 2d 213, 704 N.Y.S.2d 598 (2000); Tri-G, Inc. v. Burke
Bosselman & Weaver, 2006 Ill. LEXIS 1090 . The legal theory is sound:
punitive damages are awarded to punish the wrongdoer and to deter that party
and others from committing similar acts; punitive damages are not awarded as
compensation to the plaintiff.
Arizona and some other states are in the minority. See e.g., Haberer v. Rice,
511 N.W.2d 279 (S.D. 1994); Scognamillo v. Olsen, 795 P.2d 1357 (Colo. App.
1990); Elliott v. Videan, 164 Ariz. 113 (1989); and Hunt v. Dresie, 241 Kan.
647 (1987).
Not Public.
This page is part of a private research subweb. It is not
intended to offer information.
The pages in this research
sub web are not designed for public viewing.
These pages primarily are "temporary parking places" for
entry of resource notes or materials for use during field work by Bucklin.org and
Corporate-Ethics.US. Do not expect this page to be "user friendly."
Furthermore, information in these
pages may well be outdated because it was from a past project of some time
ago.
No Legal Advice.
The publisher, editor, and author do not intend this article or
those to which it links to provide legal or other
professional services. Attorneys using this publication in dealing with a specific legal matter
should exercise their own independent judgment and should research
original sources of authority and local law. For legal advice, consult an attorney.
Copyright,©
1998 through 2013, Leonard Bucklin.
|
|