Opinion ID: 2630568
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Facts and Circumstances Surrounding Defendants' Misconduct

Text: ¶ 19 The third Crookston I factor supplements the second's objective assessment of the defendant's conduct with a more subjective inquiry into what the defendant knew and what was motivating his or her actions. Campbell, 2001 UT 89 at ¶ 35, 65 P.3d 1134. While defendant's motive of making money regardless of legal or professional duties is hardly admirable, there is, again, no evidence of intentions or actions so profoundly reprehensible as to merit punitive damages beyond ordinary measures. In suggesting that the award of punitive damages against Knapp should be further remitted we do not disturb the finding of the jury and the trial court that Knapp's actions were both culpable and reprehensible; we do point out, however, that this degree of culpability and reprehensibility does not merit punitive damages significantly outside the ratios outlined in Crookston I.