Torts—Punitive Damages in Non-Personal Injury Cases: Minnesota's Approach to Punishment and Deterrence

Damage awards in cases ranging from the explosion of a Ford Pinto 1 2 and the repainting of a BMW automobile, to the temperature setting of a McDonald's coffee maker, 3 demonstrate the commitment of this country's judicial and legislative bodies to punish defendants for their malicious, wanton, or reckless acts.This feat has been accomplished through the use of punitive damages.1. See Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co., 174 Cal.Rptr.348, 389 (Cal.Ct.App.1981) (awarding plaintiff $3.5 million in punitive damages as a result of defective automobile manufacture, which directly contributed to the severity of the damages incurred by the plaintiff.The court allowed the award to stand, finding malice or corporate responsibility for malice.)2. See BMW of N. Am. v. Gore, 646 So. 2d 619, 629 (Ala.1994), rev'd, 116S.Ct. 1589, 1592 (1996) (remanding case because $2 million punitive damage award for fraud claim was "grossly excessive"). SeeGreene v. Boddie-Noell Ent., Inc., 966 F. Supp.416, 418 & n.1 (W.D. Va.1997) (describing an Albuquerque, New Mexico state court's award of $2.7 million in punitive damages to an 81 year-old woman who was burned by hot coffee she purchased at McDonald's).