Case ID: so2d_710/html/0900-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HOOPER, Chief Justice. SEE, Justice BUTTS, Justice", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Doyle D. BRYANT v. BRYANT WELDING & INDUSTRIAL MAINTENANCE, INC.
    1961384, 1961385.
    Supreme Court of Alabama.
    Feb. 27, 1998.
    Robert Straub and J. Timothy Kyle of Russell, Straub & Kyle, Decatur, for appellant.
    Jerry Knight, Decatur, for appellee.
   HOOPER, Chief Justice.

AFFIRMED. NO OPINION.

See Rule 53(a)(1) and (a)(2)(F), Ala. R.App. P.

SHORES, HOUSTON, KENNEDY, and COOK, JJ., concur.

SEE, J., concurs specially.

MADDOX and BUTTS, JJ., concur in part and dissent in part.

SEE, Justice

(concurring specially).

In this ease, the jury awarded $225,838 in punitive damages and $100,000 in compensatory damages — a 2.26:1 ratio. This ratio of punitive damages to compensatory damages is lower than the 3:1 benchmark set forth in my special writing in Life Insurance Co. of Georgia v. Johnson, 701 So.2d 524, 535, 539 (Ala.1997) (See, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). Accordingly, in my view, heightened scrutiny of the trial court’s determination at the Hammond/Green Oil hearing is not warranted. Although the punitive award in this case could exceed 10% of one computation of Doyle Bryant’s estimated net worth, net worth is but one aspect of a defendant’s financial position. A defendant’s financial position, in turn, is but one of several Hammond/Green Oil factors. See Johnson, 701 So.2d at 541 (discussing the ratio of punitive damages to compensatory damages, the reprehensibility of the defendant’s conduct, the size of similar criminal and civfl sanctions, the profitability of the conduct to the defendant, and the costs of litigation). In this case, Bryant misappropriated over $950,-000 of his former partner’s business, in direct violation of a court order. Considering all of the Hammond/Green Oil factors, and especially the reprehensibility of Bryant’s conduct, I cannot say that the trial court erred in determining that the award was reasonable.

BUTTS, Justice

(concurring in part and dissenting in part).

I concur with the majority’s affirmance of the finding of liability against Doyle Bryant and its affirmance of the award of compensatory damages for the violation of a consent judgment relating to business activity in competition with his brother, Dalton Bryant. However, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s affirmance of the trial court’s denial of Doyle Bryant’s motion for a remittitur of the punitive damages award. The majority affirms a $225,838 punitive damages award against Doyle Bryant and the other two defendants. Even if Bryant ultimately pays only one-third of that award, that amount would represent 12% of his net worth; that exceeds the 10% level noted by this Court in its final opinion in BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, 701 So.2d 507 (Ala.1997), as possibly marking the line between punishment and destruction. Moreover, if the other two defendants were to enter into pro tanto settlements with the plaintiff for sums less than their proportionate share of the punitive damages award, or otherwise failed to pay that share, then Bryant could be made to pay the entire remainder of the punitive damages award. Thus, it is possible that Bryant would have to pay the majority of the $225,838 punitive damages award, from a net worth of only $620,000.

In Sheffield v. Andrews, 679 So.2d 1052 (Ala.1996), this Court affirmed a $1 million punitive award against Willie Sheffield, who had been found to have conspired to defraud 91-year-old Lillian Andrews out of a parcel of real property. At most, Sheffield’s net worth was $1,220,300. Thus, this Court affirmed a punitive damages award against an Alabama citizen that represented 82% of his net worth. I dissented, stating that a remit-titur of the punitive damages was warranted and that a punitive award of $350,000 would have been sufficient punishment for Sheffield. Although the $350,000 figure for punitive damages I thought appropriate punishment for Sheffield’s misconduct also crosses the 10% line noted in BMW, supra, Sheffield was decided before BMW, and Sheffield’s misconduct against an elderly woman was exceptionally reprehensible and justified greater punishment than 10% of his net worth.

The majority’s affirmance of the substantial punitive awards in this case and in Sheffield, when compared to other recent cases where this Court has remitted punitive damages awards, see Talent Tree Personnel Services, Inc. v. Fleenor, 703 So.2d 917 (Ala.1997); American Pioneer Life Ins. Co. v. Williamson, 704 So.2d 1361 (Ala.1997); Ford Motor Co. v. Sperau, 708 So.2d 111 (Ala.1997); Life Ins. Co. of Georgia v. Johnson, 701 So.2d 524 (Ala.1997), seems to indicate that this Court has been inconsistent in its review of punitive damages awards.

I would reverse the trial court’s denial of Doyle Bryant’s motion for a remittitur of the punitive damages award and remand this cause for the trial court to take into consideration in a new Hammond-Green Oil hearing all the factors set forth by this Court in BMW, supra, which had not yet been released when the trial court issued its judgment.

MADDOX, J., concurs. 
      
      . Hammond v. City of Gadsden, 493 So.2d 1374 (Ala.1986); Green Oil Co. v. Hornsby, 539 So.2d 218 (Ala.1989).
     
      
      
        . Hammond v. City of Gadsden, 493 So.2d 1374 (Ala.1986); Green Oil Co. v. Hornsby, 539 So.2d 218 (Ala.1989).