The Winston-Salem Journal reports on a jury award of $9.2 million in compensatory damages and $74.2 million in punitive damages against R.J. Reynolds and Philip Morris in a lawsuit brought by the surviving spouse of a smoker who died from respiratory disease.  According to the article, this is the first known trial involving claims brought by a same-sex surviving spouse in the decades of Florida tobacco litigation (the so-called “Engle progeny litigation”).

Law 360 reports (subscription required) that FilmOn founder Alki David has been hit for $4.35 million in punitive damages in a lawsuit alleging that he committed sexual battery against a former employee.  The jury awarded $650,000 in compensatory damages (resulting in a ratio of 6.7 to 1)

David previously lost an $11 million verdict to another former employee who made similar claims.

The BBC News reports that a jury in Philadelphia has awarded $8 billion in punitive damages against Johnson & Johnson in a lawsuit over the anti-psychotic drug Risperdal. 

The plaintiff is a man who alleged that he grew breasts as a result of taking Risperdal and was not warned about that possible side effect.  A jury in 2015 awarded $1.75 million in compensatory damages, which the trial court later reduced to $680,000 and barred punitive damages.  The state appellate court reversed the ruling on punitive damages and sent the case back for a retrial on that issue. After this verdict, the case is undoubtedly heading back up on appeal again.

Johnson & Johnson is no stranger to colossal punitive damages awards.  The company has been battered by a series of adverse jury verdicts in cases involving its pelvic mesh implants and talc products, not to mention a billion dollar verdict in a Texas case involving hip implants.  Oh, and it’s fighting a $572 million award by an Oklahoma judge who found the company responsible for that state’s opioid epidemic.

The Wall Street Journal has an op-ed about the case entitled An $8 Billion Drug Heist.

This post is a bit tardy, but here’s a link to the July 26 L.A. Times story about a ruling that reduced the $2 billion Roundup punitive damages award to $87 million (and reduced the $55 million compensatory damages award to $17.3 million).

This post is a bit tardy, but here’s a link to the July 26 L.A. Times story about a ruling that reduced the $2 billion Roundup punitive damages award to $87 million (and reduced the $55 million compensatory damages award to $17.3 million).

Law 360 reports that U.S.District Judge Vince Chhabria has reduced a $75 million punitive damages award to $20 million in a Roundup-based lawsuit against Monsanto.  The compensatory damages are roughly $5.2 million.

[Disclosure: Horvitz & Levy represents Monsanto in Roundup litigation]

Law 360 reports that U.S.District Judge Vince Chhabria has reduced a $75 million punitive damages award to $20 million in a Roundup-based lawsuit against Monsanto.  The compensatory damages are roughly $5.2 million.

[Disclosure: Horvitz & Levy represents Monsanto in Roundup litigation]

The LA Times reports that a jury awarded $13.3 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in punitive damages against Huy Fong Foods, Inc., the maker of Sriracha sauce. 

The plaintiff is Underwood Ranches, who had supplied Huy Fong with jalapeno peppers.  Underwood claimed they suffered dramatic losses when Huy Fong abruptly terminated their contract.  The story doesn’t explain the basis for punitive damages, which ordinarily aren’t available in contract disputes.

The LA Times reports that a jury awarded $13.3 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in punitive damages against Huy Fong Foods, Inc., the maker of Sriracha sauce.

The plaintiff is Underwood Ranches, who had supplied Huy Fong with jalapeno peppers.  Underwood claimed they suffered dramatic losses when Huy Fong abruptly terminated their contract.  The story doesn’t explain the basis for punitive damages, which ordinarily aren’t available in contract disputes.

We previously reported on the punitive damages awarded against Oberlin college for libel, and the fight between the parties on how to apply Ohio’s cap on punitive damages.  The trial court appears to have adopted the plaintiffs’ argument that the cap, which limits punitive damages to twice the amount of compensatory damages, applies to the amount of compensatory damages awarded by the jury, not the amount of compensatory damages after reduction of those damages due to a separate cap on noneconomic damages.

As a result, the court has entered a judgment in the amount of $25 million.  The jury awarded $44.2 million and the college was seeking to have it reduced to $14.2 million.

View the judgment here (link courtesy of Legal Insurrection).