'Common Sense Legal Reform' and Bell's Toll: Eliminating Punitive Damage Claims from Jurisdictional Amount Calculations in Federal Diversity Cases
Russell G. Murphy
Suffolk University Law School
Kentucky Law Journal, Vol. 84, p. 71, 1995
This article re-examines, in the context of modern federal court diversity of citizenship litigation, the rule of Bell v. Preferred Life Assurance Society (US Supreme Court 1943) that punitive damage claims can be used to satisfy the jurisdictional amount requirements for federal court diversity jurisdiction. It considers the history of diversity jurisdiction, major criticisms of reliance on punitive damages, the larger debate over justifications for such damages, and the ways in which jurisdiction based on punitive damages disrupts the functioning of federal courts. The article concludes with a recommendation that either the Supreme Court or Congress reverse Bell and prohibit use of punitive damages in measuring the existence of the jurisdictional amount in diversity law suits.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 36Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: August 26, 2007
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.390 seconds