1. Proposal:
Compensatory damages are used to restore the person who was wronged to the
position where s/he was before the damaging incident occurred. Don’t you get confused
compensatory damage with punitive damage? Punitive damage is not to compensate
plaintiff but to punish defender, so, my proposal is to use punitive damage award for
social causes to prevent or deter similar intentional misconduct.
Fact:
Plaintiff Charlene Roby was hired as a receptionist in November 1974 by McKesson, a
healthcare product and services supplier. Over the next 25 years, she got number of
promotions, culminating in her final position as a customer service liaison. Roby began
suffering from panic attacks in 1997 and the source of her disorder was unknown.
Roby was prescribed medication and her disorder was under control until she got a new
supervisor, Karen Schoener. According to her testimonials he supervisor harassed
discriminate her because of her disorder.
In May 2000 due to her excessive absence, she was terminated. After her termination,
she sued both McKesson and Ms. Schoener for harassment and discrimination in
violation of FEHA as well as McKesson only for failure to accommodate. “The Fair
Employment and Housing Commission promotes and enforces the civil rights of the
people of California to be free from unlawful discrimination in employment, housing, and
public accommodations, and to be free from hate violence and threats of violence,
1

2. pursuant to the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA, Gov. Code, §12900 et seq.).”
(Fair Employment and Housing Commission, 2007)
Decision:
The jury decided to award $3 million compensation plus $15 million in punitive
damages, although the Supreme Court reduced the award to $1,905,000.
Problem:
Before talk about what right or wrong about punitive damage awards we must
understand what punitive damage is. Punitive damages are an established practice of
American common law, traditionally assessed against defendants in civil cases, it would
be wrong to think punitive damage award is to compensate plaintiff but it is to punish
defendant monetarily for intentional misconduct and to deter similar future act. To
determine the amount juries are given the Book of Approved Jury Instructions:
 “The reprehensibility of the conduct of the defendant.
 The amount of punitive damages which will have a deterrent effect on the
defendant in the light of defendant’s financial condition.
 That the punitive damages must bear a reasonable relation to the injury,
harm, or damage actually suffered by the plaintiff.” (Cotchett & Molumphy,
1998)
2

3. In this case, Juries came up with 3 million compensatory damages and 15 million in
punitive damages. First of all, how can we put a price tag on emotional crises and even
if we do, shouldn’t compensatory award is enough. Compensatory damages are
payback to plaintiff for their losses, pain, suffering, loss of income, medical expenses
and future medical expenses as a result of someone else’s negligence, where punitive
damage is to punish the defendant and yet everyone routinely asks for punitive
damage in all civil lawsuits. It is because recent years punitive damage is getting
astronomically large in amounts when they are awarded. Are we setting any example?
Law theoretically put forth an illustration not to teach just the offender but the society to
learn from it. But present punitive law spoiling the society economically instate of
serving.
Solution:
Several states realized the matter of concern and reformed punitive damages awards,
for example,
 State of Missouri Requires 50% of all punitive damages awards to be paid to the
state fund. HB 700 (1987).
 State Oregon Requires 40% of punitive damages awards to be paid to the
prevailing party, 60% to the state fund, and no more than 20% to the attorney of
the prevailing party. SB 482 (1995)
 State of Iowa Requires 75% or more of all punitive damages awards to be paid to
the State Civil Reparations Trust Fund. SB 2265 (1986)(Home: Issues: American
Tort Reform Association, 2011)
3

4. This payment can be engaged towards the injustices that happened. For instance,
Plaintiff Charlene Roby suffered discrimination and harassment against her, so, now the
fund can’t help aware people how to fight against discriminations and other in injustice
at workplace.
Conclusion:
The availability of punitive damages protects us all by holding wrongdoers accountable
for deliberate misconduct and deterring its future occurrence but we have to bear in
mind this punishment must teach a lesson. We should not harm (economically) an
organization too roughly that it’s unable to continue its business otherwise we are
holding accountable each and every one works in the company.
Works Cited
Cotchett, J. W., & Molumphy, M. C. (1998). Punitive Damages: Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, LLP.
Retrieved from Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, LLP: http://www.cpmlegal.com/news-publications-
17.html
Fair Employment and Housing Commission. (2007). Retrieved from Home: Fair Employment
and Housing Commission: http://www.fehc.ca.gov/
Home: Issues: American Tort Reform Association. (2011). Retrieved from American Tort
Reform Association: http://www.atra.org/issues/punitive-damages-reform
Home: Issues: American Tort Reform Association. (2011). Retrieved from American Tort
Reform Association: http://www.atra.org/issues/punitive-damages-reform
4