In Krysa v. Paine, where Paine’s Car Company was found to have committed fraud in the sale of a truck to Krysa, what did the court rule regarding the punitive damages award?

In Krysa v. Paine, where Paines Car Company was found to have committed fraud

in the sale of a truck to Krysa, what did the court rule regarding the punitive damages

award?

a.        Punitive damages are allowed at 9:1 in cases involving personal injury but incon-

tracts must adhere to a 3: 1 ratio.

b.        Punitive damages are limited to 9:1 in all cases.

c.         Punitive damages should never have a cap or their function as a deterrent and punish-

ment would be lost.

d.        Punitive damages are not available in a fraud action based on a contract.

e.         Punitive damages of 27:1 are permitted in cases of extreme fraud.

Latest Assignments