Opinion ID: 7212
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Whether Satcher Is Entitled to Punitive Damages

Text: 26 Judgment as a matter of law is proper on an issue if there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for that party on that issue. FED.R.CIV.P. 50(a). In reviewing the denial of a motion for judgment, a jury verdict must be upheld unless the facts and inferences point so strongly and so overwhelmingly in favor of one party that reasonable men could not arrive at any verdict to the contrary. Western Co. of North America v. United States, 699 F.2d 264, 276 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 892, 104 S.Ct. 237, 78 L.Ed.2d 228 (1983). 27 The law of Mississippi allows punitive damages only in extreme cases; they are not favored in the law and are to be allowed only with caution and within narrow limits. Tideway Oil Programs, Inc. v. Serio, 431 So.2d 454, 460 & n. 1 (Miss.1983). [T]here must be some element of aggression or some coloring of insult reflecting malice, gross negligence, or ruthless disregard for the rights of others. Illinois Cent. R.R. v. White, 610 So.2d 308, 320 (Miss.1992). In regards to gross negligence, punitive damages are ordinarily recoverable only in cases where the negligence is so gross as to indicate reckless or wanton disregard of the safety of others. Beta Beta Chapter of Beta Theta Pi Fraternity v. May, 611 So.2d 889, 894 (Miss.1992) (quoting Belk v. Rosamond, 57 So.2d 461, 468 (Miss.1952)). 28 Under these standards, we conclude that Satcher was not entitled to punitive damages. Evidence relevant to this inquiry--the dangers of a motorcycle lacking leg guards and Honda's knowledge of such dangers--can be summarized as follows. While police motorcycles have leg guards, all motorcycles marketed by all manufacturers to the general public lack them. Satcher's theory, therefore, was that Honda's conduct in marketing its products in the same design of every motorcycle marketed in the world to the general public was so extreme or outrageous as to justify punitive damages. 29 Motorcycle leg injuries are a common and serious problem of which Honda and the industry as a whole are aware. Leg injuries account for a significant percentage of all motorcycle injuries. The concept of protective leg guards on motorcycles has existed since the 1930's. A number of scientific studies, of which Honda is aware, have been conducted over the years regarding the efficacy of leg guards. A British physician, Dr. Bothwell, conducted some early tests in the 1960's. Two engineers, Arthur Ezra and Harry Peterson, received federal funding to conduct further tests at the Denver Research Institute (DRI). They both testified as experts for Satcher, and were of the view that robust leg guards or a reinforced fairing should be available on motorcycles, and would have been effective in reducing Satcher's injuries. They believe that all motorcycles lacking leg guards are unreasonably dangerous products. An accident reconstruction expert, Dr. Fogerty, testified to the same effect. Ezra and Peterson worked with Dr. Bothwell on the DRI studies. Dr. Bothwell apparently disagrees with Ezra and Peterson, although the exact nature of the disagreement is not clear from the record. 30 Conventional leg guards or crash bars which are not as strong as Ezra and Peterson recommend are available in kits and are added to police motorcycles. Police crash bars are used in part to hold lights or other accessories needed on police vehicles. Their efficacy as a safety device is the subject of disagreement. Kenneth Harms, a former Miami police chief with experience on the motorcycle patrol and in investigating motorcycles accidents, believes that police crash guards, particularly those used on Harley-Davidson motorcycles, are effective in reducing injuries. Harms conceded that he had no scientific or engineering expertise in motorcycle design. Harley-Davidson has expressly recommended against the use of crash bars on its police motorcycles. 31 Although certain studies indicate that leg guards are effective, no government in the world has ever required them. No professional organization that reviews engineering safety standards, such as the Society of Automotive Engineers or the American National Standards Institute, has ever recommended leg guards. Ezra believes that the failure of the federal government to act on his own work was due to a deregulatory environment in government during the Carter/Reagan years and pressure from the industry. 32 Honda presented two well-qualified experts, John Snider and Warner Riley, who opined that leg guards should not be used because their safety benefits are outweighed by their safety disadvantages, including the possibility of greater upper body injuries. For example, Riley explained that the problem with unpadded robust bars is that they can cause the cyclist to leave the motorcycle and land upside down, and that padded crash bars increase in-flight whiplash, which can result in a broken neck. They were also of the view that in this particular accident Satcher would not have benefitted from crash bars. There is a disagreement in the scientific community as to whether head impact increases when crash bars are used. 33 Honda itself conducted certain crash tests in the 1960's. One report concluded that at certain speeds crash bars are effective at reducing leg impact in an angled collision. However, it found that in broadside collisions there seems to be an indication that each of the various body area impacts is greater in the case of motorcycles equipped with crash bars than in the case of those which are not, and that a commercially available crash bar has no protective effect or it has a possible reverse effect in broadside collision[s]. This conclusion was disputed by Ezra as not supported by Honda's own experimental data. The report also noted that it was far from definitive. 4 A Honda chief engineer testified that thus far we have created, tested, evaluated various experimental devices; however, we have yet to come up with a ... practical as well as effective device that would protect the leg. 34 Summarizing, the jury heard evidence that (1) there is a genuine dispute in the scientific community as to whether leg guards do more harm than good, (2) no government or agency thereof has ever required them, (3) no independent testing or professional organization has ever recommended them, (4) one of the original researchers on the problem who worked with two of plaintiff's experts disagrees with them, (5) the industry as a whole categorically rejects the need for leg guards, and (6) Honda's own testing on their use reached no definitive conclusions. On this record we hold that no reasonable jury could conclude under Mississippi law that this is an extreme case meriting punitive damages, or that Honda's conduct rose to level of malice, ruthless disregard or gross negligence required for the imposition of such damages. We therefore vacate the award of punitive damages.