Court Opinion

ID: 9795378
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 03:27:53.77647+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:29:49.308132
License: Public Domain

concurring in part, dissenting in part.
I fully concur in the majority's opinion until Paragraph 24. On this issue, considering the ample award of $41,856.86 in compensatory damages, the jury's award of $58,-143.14 1 in exemplary damages strikes me as manifestly unreasonable, grossly excessive, likely the product of the jury's sympathy or prejudice, and "larger than reason dictates to be necessary to deter such conduct in this defendant and others similarly situated." Buzzard v. Farmers Ins. Co., Inc., 1991 OK 127, ¶ 54, 824 P.2d 1105, 1116; Chandler v. Denton, 1987 OK 38, ¶ 30, 741 P.2d 855, 868; Timmons v. Royal Globe Ins. Co., 1982 OK 97, ¶ 44, 653 P.2d 907, 915. Accord, American Nat. Bank & Trust Co. of Sapulpa v. BIC Corp., 1994 OK CIV APP 70, 880 P.2d 420, Scribner v. Hillcrest Medical Center, 1992 OK CIV APP 117, 866 P.2d 437. Under the facts and cireumstances of this case, I would find an award of $1,000.00 in exemplary damages more than reasonable and adequate to punish SWBYP, and would direct remittitur of the remaining punitive damage award.
I therefore respectfully concur in part and dissent in part.

. When combined with the compensatory award, for total damages of exactly $100,000.00.