- Joined
- Feb 17, 2006
- Posts
- 6,058
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 28
- Points
- 183
- Location
- The grey country
- Sexuality
- No Response
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday threw out the record $2.5 billion (1.3 billion pounds) in punitive damages that Exxon Mobil Corp had been ordered to pay for the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill off Alaska, the nation's worst tanker spill.
By a 5-3 vote, the high court ruled that the punitive damages award should be slashed -- limited by the circumstances of the case to an amount equal to the total relevant compensatory damages of $507.5 million.
By a 5-3 vote, the high court ruled that the punitive damages award should be slashed -- limited by the circumstances of the case to an amount equal to the total relevant compensatory damages of $507.5 million.
The justices overturned a ruling by a U.S. Court of Appeals that had awarded the record punitive damages to about 32,000 commercial fishermen, Alaska natives, property owners and others harmed by the nation's worst tanker spill.
In the majority opinion, Justice David Souter concluded the $2.5 billion in punitive damages was excessive under federal maritime law, and should be cut to the amount of actual harm."
I agree, so why reduce it again, 20 years later.
As a side note; I wonder how much coincidence (any cynicism by me in asking the question) lies in Justice David Souter being a Bush appointee?
Exxon Valdez oil spill ruling overturned
In the majority opinion, Justice David Souter concluded the $2.5 billion in punitive damages was excessive under federal maritime law, and should be cut to the amount of actual harm."
I agree, so why reduce it again, 20 years later.
As a side note; I wonder how much coincidence (any cynicism by me in asking the question) lies in Justice David Souter being a Bush appointee?
Exxon Valdez oil spill ruling overturned