Reply #105: which is why massey coal has thus far not had to pay the millions in fines levied [View All]

[Hannah Bell]

against it over multiple years, even as its violations of basic practices murder people outright.

which is why after the exxon valdez spill (1989), exxon just kept challenging the damages award for over 20 years to get it whittled away by judges & inflation:


In the case of Baker v. Exxon, an Anchorage jury awarded $287 million for actual damages and $5 billion for punitive damages.

The punitive damages amount was equal to a single year's profit by Exxon at that time.

Exxon appealed the ruling, and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the original judge, Russel Holland, to reduce the punitive damages.

On December 6, 2002, the judge announced that he had reduced the damages to $4 billion...

Exxon appealed again...

After more appeals...on January 27, 2006, the damages award was cut to $2.5 billion on December 22, 2006...

Exxon appealed again. On May 23, 2007, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied ExxonMobil's request for a third hearing and let stand its ruling that Exxon owes $2.5 billion in punitive damages.

Exxon then appealed to the Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case.<16>

On February 27, 2008, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments for 90 minutes. Justice Samuel Alito, who at the time, owned between $100,000 and $250,000 in Exxon stock, recused himself from the case.<17> In a decision issued June 25, 2008, Justice David Souter issued the judgment of the court, vacating the $2.5 billion award and remanding the case back to a lower court, finding that the damages were excessive with respect to maritime common law...



Yep, the "liberal" Souter made that call.


You were saying?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exxon_Valdez_oil_spill.