Document: 486 U.S. 71 108 S.Ct. 1645 100 L.Ed.2d 62 BANKERS LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Appellant,v.Lloyd M. CRENSHAW. No. 85-1765. Argued Nov. 30, 1987. Decided May 16, 1988. Syllabus In a state-court suit upon an insurance claim for loss of limb, the jury awarded appellee $20,000 provided by his policy and punitive damages $1.6 million based on appellant's bad-faith refusal to pay claim. Concluding that award was not excessive in light ofappellant's financial worth degree its wrongdoing, Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed verdict without modification, assessed additional 15% penalty against appellant accordance with state statute imposing such parties who appeal unsuccessfully from money judgments or other categories whose value may be readily determined. Although had raised federal constitutional challenge size award, argued, petition rehearing, "was clearly excessive, reasonably related any legitimate purpose, constitutes fine, violates principles." Appellant's Motion Correct Judgment also alleged statutory violated equal protection rights under Federal State Constitutions. Without opinion, denied rehearing Judgment. Held: 1. This will reach claims Due Process, Contract, Excessive Fines Clauses Constitution, since those were passed court. Hathorn v. Lovorn, 457 255, 102 2421, 72 824, distinguished. The rehearing's vague general principles insufficient adequately raise Contract Clause due process claims. Similarly, petition's reference award's excessiveness is too oblique have properly claim, no mention made Clause, law, Constitution contains own which could taken underlie if it understood offering challenge. Assuming this Court's "not pressed below" rule jurisdictional but merely prudential restriction, more prudent course here decline review important difficult issue. permit number less intrusive, possibly appropriate, resolutions legislature courts, while ultimate question gain benefit well-developed record reasoned opinion merits Court. Pp. 76-80. 2. Mississippi's does violate Equal Protection Fourteenth Amendment, tailored achieve State's objectives discouraging frivolous appeals, compensating appellees intangible costs litigation, conserving judicial resources. discriminate particular class appellants arbitrary irrational fashion, broadly applies both plaintiffs defendants, as well variety specified types determined judgments, limitation represents rational, partial, attempt deter appeals substantial intervention inclusion would require. Moreover, poses little danger meritorious along insubstantial ones, operates only after judgment has been modification relatively modest assessment. Lindsey Normet, 405 56, 92 862, 31 36, might enacted precisely served intended goals, perfection required rational-basis test. 80-85. 483 So.2d 254 (Miss.1985), affirmed. MARSHALL, J., delivered Court, REHNQUIST, C.J., BRENNAN, joined, all Part II WHITE, n. 1 O'CONNOR, SCALIA, JJ., III BLACKMUN, joined. filed concurring part, post, p. ----. part judgment, dissenting STEVENS KENNEDY, took consideration decision case. Theodore B. Olson, Washington, D.C., appellant. Bruce J. Ennis, Jr., appellee. Justice MARSHALL case we must decide whether Clause. 2 * action grows out allegations Bankers Life Casualty Company refused bad faith Lloyd Crenshaw's limb. According testimony at trial, injured January 6, 1979, when car alternator he repairing rolled off workbench landed foot. Three days later, injury responded home treatment, went emergency room local Air Force base hospital. Hospital doctors prescribed splint, crutches, pain medication, told return week. Appellee revisited hospital three times over next five days, each time complaining continuing By last visit, appellee's foot swollen begun turn blue, examining doctor recommended surgery consultation. admitted hospital, where, 17, surgeon surgical amputation necessary. following day, leg amputated below knee. 3 At amputation, insured group issued limb accidental bodily injury. April submitted policy. Appellant apparent basis denial Medical Director, Dr. Nathaniel McParland, cause accident pre-existing condition arteriosclerosis, degenerative vascular disease. company's furnishing statement signed treated him They stated arteriosclerosis " 'an underlying immediate gangrenous necrosis. precipating [sic] event considered trauma initially brought Emergency Room 9 January.' 254, 261 (Miss.1985). McParland company analyst concluded inconsequential, adhered position responsible 4 persisted efforts recover policy, eventually hiring attorney, intransigence. correspondence repeatedly asserted suffered defined is, ' "bodily injury, causing force, directly independently causes effected solely through person." Id., 262, quoting letter Apr. 8, 1980, Wm. Herzau contemporaneous internal memoranda, however, noted notwithstanding language, entitled recovery law "aggravate[d], render[ed] active, set motion latent dormant physical disease." 263. memoranda demonstrated knew files incomplete yet never attempted obtain medical records, most notably report, even though procedures efforts. 5 After again ground there evidence 'injury caused "directly causes," see id., 263, His complaint requested actual damages, and, amended, $1,635,000 tort million. 6 modification. It wrongdoing. See 279. Because $243,000, added statute. Miss.Code Ann. § 11-3-23 (Supp. 1987). did award.1 Following affirmance verdict, rehearing. argued "[t]he damage App. Juris. Statement 139a. An accompanying brief "due process, protection, standards." 151a. "violat[ed] Life" guaranteed 106a-107a. overruled 7 focuses challenging contends foremost Eighth Amendment's guarantee "excessive fines [shall be] imposed." argues first, awards rendered civil cases, second, constitutionally excessive. addition challenges grounds Process probable jurisdiction questions presented statement, do fall within our appellate jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C. 1257(2). We therefore treat them contained writ certiorari, unrestricted notation grant these Mishkin New York, 383 502, 512, 86 958, 965, 16 56 (1966). conclude, court, here. ibid. ("The issue thus remains certiorari jurisdiction, may, good reason, stage, issue, much dismiss improvidently granted"). 8 maintains various before urging us entertain claims, relies 262-265, 2426-2428, 824 (1982), accepted raised, upon, apposite conclude But preserve A party generally invoking court awaiting specify provision relying upon. Cf. Taylor Illinois, 484 400, 407, 9, 646, 652, 98 798 (1988) ("A generic Amendment sufficient unidentified Bill Rights . ."). colorably raises cognizable one Amendment. language allow now urges resolve. As Webb Webb, 451 493, 501, 101 1889, 1894, 68 392 (1981), "[a]t minimum should doubt courts apprised nature substance manner law." alleges fine indicate matter, federal. certainly identify source Indeed, crucial whatsoever law. failure invoke especially problematic because Miss. Const., Art. 3, 28. Thus, challenge, very anchored Constitution. U.S., 496-498, S.Ct., 1891-1892 (finding party's "full credit" proceedings failed full credit clause); 502-503, 1894-1895 (MARSHALL, dissenting). like below.2 Whether deprives power unsettled question. then REHNQUIST wrote Illinois Gates, 462 213, 103 2317, 76 527 (1983), cases somewhat inconsistent their characterization rule. Early opinions seemed requirement jurisdictional, whereas recent view restriction pose insuperable bar review. 218-219, 2321-2322 (discussing cases). are called today conclusively characterize rule, assuming prudential, believe 10 determining exercise below, focused policies animate These comity States, constellation practical considerations, chief among need developed appeal. supra, 500-501, 1893-1894. resolve—whether serves limit cases—is some moment difficulty, apply special force. 224, 2325 ("Where issues great public importance involved, strong reasons adhere scrupulously customary limitations discretion"); 512-513, 965 far-reaching tendered clarity require justify decision"). Our short-circuit resolutions: Legislature choose enact legislation addressing claims;3 failing that, resolve adequate independent nonfederal ground; opportunity first instance, undertake merits. think unwise foreclose possibilities, address award. 11 There "penalty statute," requires unsuccessful several determined, assessment judgment.4 singles penalizes unsuccessful, regardless merit denying Judgment, upheld validity 12 Under jurisprudence, "presumed valid sustained classification rationally interest." Cleburne Living Center, Inc., 473 432, 440, 105 3249, 3254, 87 313 (1985). interests assertedly detailed Walters Inexco Oil Co., 440 268 (1983). statute, version 1857, "expresses state's interest appeals. likewise expresses bona fide providing measure compensation successful appellee, having endured slings arrows litigation." 274-275. similar vein, protects integrity appellant-defendants prolonging litigation "squeeze favorable settlement impecunious" 275. Also, "tells litigants trial itself momentous event, centerpiece just step weighing station en route endless rehearings reconsiderations." Ibid. Finally, furthers 13 legitimacy cannot seriously doubted, statutes serve interests. See, e.g., & Ins. Co. McCray, 291 566, 54 482, 78 L.Ed. 987 (1934) (upholding companies wrongfully refuse benefits); also, Louisville Nashville R. Stewart, 241 261, 36 586, 588, 60 989 (1916) (State make "costly where ultimately upheld") (Holmes, J.). 78, 877, (1972) ("We reasonable procedural provisions safeguard litigated property discourage patently appeals") (citation omitted). offends legislative means chosen 14 arguing seeks draw support supra. addressed constitutionality Oregon tenants eviction post bond twice amount rent expected accrue pending forfeited landlord lower agreed doublebond Clause.5 "unrelated accrued specific landlord." 77, 876. requirement, burdened tenants, including nonfrivolous, erected "a barrier faced litigant Oregon." 79, 877. bore "no relationship objective" discriminated appealing adverse decisions wrongful-detainer actions "arbitrary irrational" fashion. 76-77, 875-876, 15 demonstrates, discrimination deferential standard Unlike Lindsey, single First, singled narrow defendant-tenants discriminatory sweep far broader: long list infra. Second, generally, rational connection between statute's objective choice impose can If wanted similarly kinds either erect fixed relation suit, else appropriate penalties using kind individualized procedure, considerable cost resources, exactly what aims avoid. instead partial solution many, all, requiring significant commitment governmental Appellants delineated target scheme proportional penalty, computed intervention. 877 discern nothing purposes [wrongful detainer] characteristics landlord-tenant warrant discrimination"). prohibit singling concludes likely deterred bringing meritless least State. addition, than ones. risk they simply lack funds during process.6 And "automatically doubled stakes," 571, 484-485 (12% oppressive). succeeded eliminating deterring say residual render irrational. 17 short, unlike double-bond condemned achievement 70, 872. possible goals only; frequently explained, so perfectly calibrated order pass muster Vance Bradley, 93, 108, 99 939, 948, 59 171 (1979). satisfied "reasonably [the legitimate] ends." 876-877. affirm 11-3-23. 18 ordered. 19 KENNEDY 20 whom SCALIA joins, part. 21 I join Parts II. continue "the gives cause, 1257(3), prevents deciding decisions. Cardinale Louisiana, 394 437, 438-439 [89 1161, 1162-1163, 22 398] (1969)." 247, 2337, (1983) (WHITE, judgment). disagree analysis—under "prudential" standards—of preservation Ante, 79-80. Ultimately, majority declines concur II's result, reasoning. judgment. 23 agree analysis footnote opinion. remainder insofar concerned. given respect well. 24 expressly invoked chilled fundamental right access authorizing unlimited damages. 135a. acknowledge argument discussion why notes present 77. suggests consider "distinct attack waged Court." 75, Standing alone, observation deprive "Parties confined same arguments advanced discussed." Dewey Des Moines, 173 193, 197-198, 379, 380-381, 43 665 (1899). 248, 25 Accordingly, examine makes determine "only enlargement" below. Dewey, 197, 380. principal changed judging insurer liable applied new retroactively explains advance notice conduct Citing struck down criminal void vagueness, Roberts United States Jaycees, 468 609, 104 3244, 82 (1984); Giaccio Pennsylvania, 382 399, 518, 447 (1966), Brief 40-43. Then, supplemental leave, expands mounts permitting juries ad hoc basis. Postargument 4-10. 26 touched worthy attention discretion defendant acts certain mental state. my view, character awards, reason 27 Punitive compensate but, rather, "to punish reprehensible future occurrence." Gertz Welch, 418 323, 350, 94 2997, 3012, 41 789 (1974). measured limits amount. Hence, impact windfall recoveries unpredictable potentially substantial." Electrical Workers Foust, 442 42, 50, 2121, 2127, 698 For reasons, forbidden defamation suits private plaintiffs, Gertz, 349-359, 3011-3012, unfair representation unions Railway Labor Act, Workers, 52, 2128. scrutinize carefully lawsuits. common committed state, "for willful intentional wrong, gross negligence reckless equivalent wrong." 269 (Miss.1985) (opinion below). describe precision, ensue left completely indeterminate. said, determination matter authority jury." 278. wholly standardless severity punishment appears process. recognized "vague sentencing consequences violating statute." Batchelder, 114, 123, 2198, 2204, 755 Nothing warned committing expect incur 29 question, serious decided today. submission briefs oral correspondingly abbreviated. assert theory "mere so. leave another day issues. 30 (except 1) II, WHITE entertaining discussed resolved discretion, follow course, O'CONNOR regarding exercised concerning her 32 33 refrain it. conclusion (Supp.1987), Nonetheless, survive scrutiny dissent contrary. 34 Section 'is appeal.' Pearce Ford Motor 235 281, 283 (Miss.1970), Meek Alexander, 137 117, 121, So. 69, 70 (1924). Not appellants, subject penalizing effect. imposes lump-sum "damages," calculated possessory action.1 prevailing unsatisfied plaintiff cross-appellant. 35 burdens substantially expensive affirmed, thereby obviously creates disincentive appeal.2 resources." 85. automatic related" interests.3 To contrary, money-judgment "is attenuated distinction [and] irrational." 446, 3258, desire "having litigation," 268, 274-275 (Miss.1983), economic noneconomic terms. justification prevail Defendants successfully defended seeking subjected prove emotional Yet, receive "compensation" imposed nonprevailing arbitrarily discriminates defendant-appellants offers drawn. 37 surprisingly, then, objective, despite interest. Instead, upholds protecting "from being spend energy resources thoughtlessly taken." So.2d, ante, 81-82. (1972), explained adopt "reasonable rules ends uniformly nondiscriminatorily applied." meet standard. neither uniform nondiscriminatory manner, nor "patently appeals." 38 frivolous; whenever if, case, 5-4 automatically made. Such sweeps deterrent net.4 39 screen persuasive requirement. found "unpersuasive" "bars nonfrivolous unable allows others afford bond." discourages avoid assume risk. More strikingly, entirely incursion penalty. provides conclusory assertion susceptible "most claims." 84. 40 bottom, majority's reasoning sustaining mandatory amounts larger heavily Lindsey. 83-85. benchmark burdening Each justified purportedly further. demonstrate goals. reversed. dissent. offer "chilling effect" litigant's courts. read open-endedness distinct way qualify enlargements" mere enlargement doctrine, "[p]arties 198, 380, Stanley 645, 658, 10, 1208, 1216, 551 (1972). clear, manner. "A said refer it." 200, 381. Several action. Fla.Stat.Ann. 713.31(2)(c) (fraudulent filing mechanics' lien); Wash.Rev.Code 9A.36.080 (1987) (malicious harassment); Cal.Civ.Code 1787.3 (West 1985) (consumer denial). Code (Supp.1987) provides: "In decree fails prosecute effect, supreme shall rate fifteen percent (15%), follows: sum money, sum. possession real personal property, property. dissolution injunction restraining chancery, enjoined restrained. personal, sale it, satisfy proceeds sale, enforce establish lien charge complained it; greater decree; provided, above condemnee eminent domain circumstances." appear defendant-appellants, Life, plaintiff-appellants, meager. Eagle Lumber Supply Robertson, 161 135 499 (1931) (applying former plaintiff-appellant). attacked proceed six months bring defenses. appellants' facial 64-69, 869-872. impermissibly litigants' system. indicated effective foreclosure only—for example, indigent litigants—might guarantees scrutiny, rightly lacks standing basis, foreclosed Broadrick Oklahoma, 413 601, 610, 93 2908, 2914-2915, 830 (1973). intermediate Appeals matters originating coming numerous administrative agencies. Trial Lawyers Assn. Amicus Curiae 4-5, 4. "[e]very losing appeal" 275 (Miss.1983). That tribunal observed "unfettered brings evils." asserts assessment," 84, compared tenant, facile. Pursuant 11-3-23, $243,000 instant case; extraordinary modesty imposition. true burdensome sense posted taken, effectively defendants. surely burdensome. (disapproving stakes defense, "legitimate" analysis. unnecessarily broad illuminated comparison Rule 38, adopted July 1987, 1, 1988, sanctions taking apply. reflects recognition specifically identified, further demonstrates irrationality distinguishing

Category: 7