Buffalo Creek and the Question of Punitive vs. Compensatory Damages

Buffalo Creek and punitive damages are fundamental principles in the American legal system. However, in recent US cases, some have raised controversy on this issue, the most famous being the "hot coffee case" 1. In 1994, Stella Liebeck bought a cup of coffee at McDonald 's restaurant, sprinkled it, and burned it seriously. She sued McDonald's for damages of 160,000 dollars and punitive damages of 2.9 million dollars. The judge subsequently lowered punitive damages to 480,000 dollars.

Legally, damages are compensation paid to people as compensation for loss or injury, usually money. Damages are classified as compensation (or actual) damage and punitive damages. Compensatory damages can be further divided into extraordinary losses, namely economic losses such as loss of income, property damage and medical expenses, and general damage that is economic losses such as pain, distress and mental distress . In general, punitive damages are not intended to compensate plaintiffs, but are intended to reform or prevent acts such as damages to plaintiffs by defendants and similar persons. Punitive damages are granted only in exceptional circumstances where the defendant acts in a clear fault, malicious or seriously reckless way.

In France and many civil law countries, the concept of punitive damages is neglected and is rarely used in practice. However, there was a change in the field of punitive damages submitted to the Constitutional Council. In France, compensation lawsuits are sometimes used as remedies for litigation, but it is by no means punitive damages. Punitive damages (example) are said to be against the basic purpose of the civil code system. Compared with the United States, France has a lower penal enforcement rate in prison. According to the defense judicial body, the US imprisoned 726 people per 100 thousand people, France only imprisoned 91 people per 100 thousand. Typical penalties for crimes such as theft, rape, assault, treason and murder are imprisoned if the length and fine are different.

Some states use the term "nominal" or "real" to represent compensation damages. In either case, the concept is the same. As its name implies, punitive damages are assessed as punishing offenders and are usually not logically related to compensatory damage. Therefore, it is not unusual for compensation for damages to be compensated, and the rules of punitive damages are taken in by the provinces. For example, a state may have allowed such ruling for damages, and if it can be proven that the action of the official is 'badly inappropriate', punitive damages are appropriate unless 'reckless' is indicated It may not be. Litigation based on 42 USC 5 In 1983, the city's defendant could not be sentenced to punitive damages. The same is true for some state court proceedings.