Rufo v. OJ Simpson - Right Of Publicity

Page 48
Distributors, Inc. (1979) 100 Cal. App. 3d 821, 839, 161 Cal. Rptr. 225
[time of
second trial should be used, not time of first trial or time of
injury];
Washington v. Farlice (1991) 1 Cal. App. 4th 766, 777 [upon appellate
reversal
of punitive damages judgment and remand for a new trial, the
defendant's
financial condition at the time of retrial should be used].) These
cases do not
hold that a defendant's future financial prospects are legally
irrelevant or
improper for the jury to consider.
Simpson's contention that evidence of his future financial prospects
is
legally [**99] irrelevant or improper makes no sense. The ultimately
proper
level of punitive damages is an amount not so low that the defendant
can absorb
it [*622] with little or no discomfort ( Neal v. Farmers Ins.
Exchange, supra,
21 Cal. 3d 910, 928), nor so high that it destroys, annihilates, or
cripples the
defendant. ( Adams v. Murakami, supra, 54 Cal. 3d 105, 112, 113; Kenly
v.
Ukegawa, supra, 16 Cal. App. 4th 49, 57.) Whether the defendant's
financial
prospects are bleak or bright is relevant to the ultimate issue whether
the
damages will ruin him or be absorbed by him. Simpson cites no authority
that
squarely supports his contention. In propounding a Model Punitive
Damages Act,
the Uniform Law Commissioners considered the law to be obviously
contrary to
Simpson's argument. Section 7(a) of the Act lists nine factors to be
considered
by a jury in determining what constitutes a fair and reasonable amount
of
punitive damages. The Commissioners endeavored "to list those factors
which are
relatively noncontroversial and which would probably come into play in
most
cases involving a claim for punitive damages." The fourth factor listed
is, "the
defendant's [**100] present and future financial condition and the
effect of an
award on each condition." (14 West's U. Laws Ann. (Master ed. 2000
supp.) Model
Punitive Damages Act, @ 7, subd. (a)(4), and com. thereto, pp. 53, 63,
64,
PAGE 36
86 Cal. App. 4th 573, *622; 2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 41, **100;
103 Cal. Rptr. 2d 492, ***526; 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Service 759