Opinion ID: 1614964
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Insufficient Evidence to Support Verdict.

Text: Crick also claims there was insufficient evidence to support the jury's punitive damage award of $30,000 for the act of conversion. The evidence to support a punitive damage award must be clear, convincing, and satisfactory. See Iowa Code § 668A.1(1)(a). There must also be evidence of willful and wanton disregard for the rights of another. Wilson v. IBP, Inc., 558 N.W.2d 132, 142 (Iowa 1996), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 810, 118 S.Ct. 52, 139 L.Ed.2d 17 (1997). Punitive damages are justified when the acts of the defendant are malicious. Beeck v. Aquaslide `N' Dive Corp., 350 N.W.2d 149, 167 (Iowa 1984). The malice may be actual (expressed) ... or it may be legal (implied), as where the defendant acts illegally or improperly with reckless disregard for another's rights. Id. (quoting Freeman v. Bonnes Trucking, Inc., 337 N.W.2d 871, 879-80 (Iowa 1983)). There was evidence in the case indicating that Crick had a duty to give the buyer incentive to Condon. There is also evidence he intentionally retained the money for his own benefit. This evidence would support a finding by a preponderance of clear, convincing, and satisfactory proof that Crick retained the money given to him by Alamo with a willful and wanton disregard for his employer's rights.