Distribution of punitive damages
- notice to Department of Justice
- order of application
Source:
Section 31.735 — Distribution of punitive damages; notice to Department of Justice; order of application, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors031.html
.
Notes of Decisions
Jury instruction based on this section which told jury that award of punitive damages would be distributed among prevailing party and their attorney and Criminal Injuries Compensation Account, injected into jury deliberation factors not properly considered in deciding whether to award punitive damages and amount thereof. Honeywell v. Sterling Furniture Co., 99 Or App 94, 781 P2d 379 (1989), modified 310 Or 206, 797 P2d 1019 (1990)
Allowing recovery of attorney fees under this provision does not preclude recovery under ORS 646.638 (3). Honeywell v. Sterling Furniture Co., 310 Or 206, 797 P2d 1019 (1990)
State’s entitlement to share of punitive damages award applies to award made in federal case arising under state law. DeMendoza v. Huffman, 334 Or 425, 51 P3d 1232 (2002)
Because plaintiff has no inherent right or interest in punitive damages award, claim by state to share of award does not violate provisions of Oregon Constitution regarding remedy for injury, trial by jury, reexamination of factual determination by jury, taking of property or taxation. DeMendoza v. Huffman, 334 Or 425, 51 P3d 1232 (2002)
Requirement that state be listed as judgment creditor for share of punitive damages award does not impermissibly intrude on judicial functions. DeMendoza v. Huffman, 334 Or 425, 51 P3d 1232 (2002)
State’s statutory share of punitive damages award is not taking of property or imposition of excessive fine in violation of United States Constitution. Engquist v. Oregon Department of Agriculture, 478 F3d 985 (9th Cir. 2007)
State has standing to enforce state interest in award of punitive damages. MAN Aktiengesellschaft v. DaimlerChrysler AG, 218 Or App 117, 179 P3d 675 (2008)
Consent of Department of Justice is not prerequisite to post-verdict, pre-judgment settlement between parties. Patton v. Target Corporation, 349 Or 230, 242 P3d 611 (2010); Patton v. Target Corporation, 627 F3d 1304 (9th Cir. 2010)
Only after court has entered judgment awarding punitive damages does state have right as judgment creditor to enforce that portion of award to be allocated to state for deposit in Criminal Injuries Compensation Account. Williams v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company, 351 Or 368, 271 P3d 103 (2011)
State’s interest in portion of punitive damages award to be allocated to state for deposit I Criminal Injuries Compensation Account arises by operation of law in any case in which punitive damages are awarded, without regard to nature of underlying litigation. Williams v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company, 351 Or 368, 271 P3d 103 (2011)
Where estate entered into agreement with its attorneys that attorneys would receive 40 percent of gross amount collected from estate’s action filed against corporation and estate received punitive damages award, and attorneys represented estate in subsequent related matter against state that resulted in another money award to estate, fee cap in this section applies only to punitive damages award from first action and not to all moneys received by estate. Williams v. Gaylord, 268 Or App 107, 341 P3d 202 (2014), Sup Ct review denied
Law Review Citations
26 WLR 755 (1990); 38 WLR 477 (2002); 46 WLR 449 (2010)