Florida Statute 768.73 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XLV
TORTS

Chapter 768
NEGLIGENCE

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 768.73

768.73 Punitive damages; limitation.—

(1)(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c), an award of punitive damages may not exceed the greater of:

1. Three times the amount of compensatory damages awarded to each claimant entitled thereto, consistent with the remaining provisions of this section; or

2. The sum of $500,000.

(b) Where the fact finder determines that the wrongful conduct proven under this section was motivated solely by unreasonable financial gain and determines that the unreasonably dangerous nature of the conduct, together with the high likelihood of injury resulting from the conduct, was actually known by the managing agent, director, officer, or other person responsible for making policy decisions on behalf of the defendant, it may award an amount of punitive damages not to exceed the greater of:

1. Four times the amount of compensatory damages awarded to each claimant entitled thereto, consistent with the remaining provisions of this section; or

2. The sum of $2 million.

(c) Where the fact finder determines that at the time of injury the defendant had a specific intent to harm the claimant and determines that the defendant’s conduct did in fact harm the claimant, there shall be no cap on punitive damages.

(d) This subsection is not intended to prohibit an appropriate court from exercising its jurisdiction under s. 768.74 in determining the reasonableness of an award of punitive damages that is less than three times the amount of compensatory damages.

(2)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), punitive damages may not be awarded against a defendant in a civil action if that defendant establishes, before trial, that punitive damages have previously been awarded against that defendant in any state or federal court in any action alleging harm from the same act or single course of conduct for which the claimant seeks compensatory damages. For purposes of a civil action, the term “the same act or single course of conduct” includes acts resulting in the same manufacturing defects, acts resulting in the same defects in design, or failure to warn of the same hazards, with respect to similar units of a product.

(b) In subsequent civil actions involving the same act or single course of conduct for which punitive damages have already been awarded, if the court determines by clear and convincing evidence that the amount of prior punitive damages awarded was insufficient to punish that defendant’s behavior, the court may permit a jury to consider an award of subsequent punitive damages. In permitting a jury to consider awarding subsequent punitive damages, the court shall make specific findings of fact in the record to support its conclusion. In addition, the court may consider whether the defendant’s act or course of conduct has ceased. Any subsequent punitive damage awards must be reduced by the amount of any earlier punitive damage awards rendered in state or federal court.

(3) The claimant attorney’s fees, if payable from the judgment, are, to the extent that the fees are based on the punitive damages, calculated based on the final judgment for punitive damages. This subsection does not limit the payment of attorney’s fees based upon an award of damages other than punitive damages.

(4) The jury may neither be instructed nor informed as to the provisions of this section.

(5) The provisions of this section shall be applied to all causes of action arising after the effective date of this act.

History.—ss. 52, 65, ch. 86-160; s. 1, ch. 87-42; s. 5, ch. 87-50; s. 1, ch. 88-335; s. 71, ch. 91-282; ss. 2, 3, ch. 92-85; s. 16, ch. 97-94; s. 23, ch. 99-225.

F.S. 768.73 on Google Scholar

F.S. 768.73 on CourtListener

Amendments to 768.73

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 768.73

Total Results: 83

Alamo Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Mancusi

632 So. 2d 1352

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jan 6, 1994 | Docket: 2020948

Cited 193 times | Published

inadmissible. The trial court also ruled that section 768.73(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1987), the statute

Myers v. CENTRAL FLORIDA INVESTMENTS, INC.

592 F.3d 1201, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 232, 108 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 111, 2010 WL 20987

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jan 6, 2010 | Docket: 1152239

Cited 51 times | Published

it determined that it was unreasonable. See id. § 768.73(1)(d). The factors the trial court is obliged

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Martin

53 So. 3d 1060, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 19008, 2010 WL 5074839

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 14, 2010 | Docket: 2406698

Cited 44 times | Published

award is presumed excessive under Florida law. Section 768.73, Florida Statutes (2005) provides, in pertinent

WR Grace & Co.-Conn. v. Waters

638 So. 2d 502, 1994 WL 233885

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 2, 1994 | Docket: 1169329

Cited 39 times | Published

three times the award of compensatory damages. § 768.73, Fla. Stat. (1993). If a slightly injured plaintiff

Lipsig v. Ramlawi

760 So. 2d 170, 2000 WL 313534

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 29, 2000 | Docket: 1325066

Cited 37 times | Published

times the compensatory damages, pursuant to section 768.73, Florida Statutes (1995). Thereafter, the Dahlawis

Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Ballard

749 So. 2d 483, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 401, 1999 Fla. LEXIS 1458, 1999 WL 669026

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Aug 26, 1999 | Docket: 1285755

Cited 35 times | Published

AS TO EXCESSIVE PUNITIVE DAMAGES, FOUND IN SECTION 768.73(1), FLORIDA STATUTES, OVERCOME IN A CASE WHERE

Gordon v. State

608 So. 2d 800, 1992 WL 324896

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Nov 12, 1992 | Docket: 1356965

Cited 30 times | Published

action accrued after the effective date of section 768.73 and the contingent fee contract was entered

Miele v. Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc.

656 So. 2d 470, 20 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 260, 1995 Fla. LEXIS 954, 1995 WL 337998

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 8, 1995 | Docket: 1283708

Cited 29 times | Published

F.2d 459 (11th Cir.1993): Does Florida Statute § 768.73 apply to arbitration awards? Id. at 460. We have

Bauer Lamp Co., Inc. v. Martin Shaffer, Howard Levi, Shaffer & Levi, Inc., a Florida Corp.

941 F.2d 1165, 20 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1128, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 21292, 1991 WL 163625

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 12, 1991 | Docket: 832220

Cited 26 times | Published

Ann. section 768.73 (West 1982) as authority for this proposition. In pertinent part section 768.73 provides:

Basel v. McFarland & Sons, Inc.

815 So. 2d 687, 2002 WL 506947

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 5, 2002 | Docket: 1277892

Cited 23 times | Published

the court considered whether an amendment to section 768.73(1)(a), Florida Statutes limiting the amount

Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Alexander

123 So. 3d 67, 2013 WL 4734565, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 14155

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 4, 2013 | Docket: 60235156

Cited 18 times | Published

falls well within the parameters set forth in section 768.73(l)(a) and (b), which permits an award of punitive

Gordon v. State

585 So. 2d 1033, 1991 WL 164385

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 27, 1991 | Docket: 2523547

Cited 18 times | Published

party plaintiff for the purpose of applying section 768.73(2)(b), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1986).[1] That

Lawnwood Medical Center Inc. v. Sadow

43 So. 3d 710, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 3813, 2010 WL 1066833

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 24, 2010 | Docket: 60295466

Cited 14 times | Published

945 So.2d at 1263. . § 768.73(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2009). See also § 768.73(4), Fla. Stat. (2009) (jury

Seay v. Greene (In Re Greene)

150 B.R. 282, 6 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 367, 1993 Bankr. LEXIS 96, 23 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 1493

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. | Filed: Jan 29, 1993 | Docket: 2447514

Cited 14 times | Published

plaintiff's 40 percent share according to Florida Statute 768.73(2)), and $81,815.02 in prejudgment interest

Peabody v. Rotan Mosle, Inc.

677 F. Supp. 1135, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12687, 1987 WL 34436

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 29, 1987 | Docket: 1657804

Cited 14 times | Published

to the Florida General Revenue Fund pursuant to § 768.73(2) of the Florida Statutes. However, since this

Vining v. Martyn

660 So. 2d 1081, 1995 WL 480671

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 16, 1995 | Docket: 1640140

Cited 9 times | Published

presumptive range of allowable punitive damages under section 768.73(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1993). In today's

James Crystal Licenses, LLC v. Infinity Radio Inc.

43 So. 3d 68, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 6935, 2010 WL 1979139

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 19, 2010 | Docket: 2401481

Cited 8 times | Published

deciding this case. As recognized in Lawnwood, section 768.73(1)(c), Florida Statute provides no cap on punitive

St. John v. Coisman

799 So. 2d 1110, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 16277, 2001 WL 1434195

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 16, 2001 | Docket: 1681643

Cited 8 times | Published

that the caps on punitive damages set forth in section 768.73, Florida Statutes (1999), did not apply to

Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Ballard

739 So. 2d 603, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 4725, 1998 WL 204710

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 29, 1998 | Docket: 203325

Cited 7 times | Published

circumstances which were presented to the trier of fact. § 768.73(1), Fla. Stat. (1993); Jenkins, 409 So.2d at 1042

Young v. Becker & Poliakoff, P.A.

88 So. 3d 1002, 2012 WL 1859108, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8252

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 23, 2012 | Docket: 60308104

Cited 6 times | Published

overcame the presumption of exces-siveness under section 768.73, Florida Statutes. The court, however, concluded

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Townsend

90 So. 3d 307

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 14, 2012 | Docket: 60309350

Cited 6 times | Published

based on the cumulative effect of prior awards”); § 768.73(2), Fla. Stat. (2009) (precluding successive punitive

Knauf Plasterboard (Tianjin) Co. v. Ziegler

219 So. 3d 882, 2017 WL 2457240, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 8310

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 7, 2017 | Docket: 60266964

Cited 5 times | Published

essential requirements of the law by construing section ,768.73(2), Fla. Stat. (2016) to allow for such discovery

Goodin v. Bank of America N.A.

114 F. Supp. 3d 1197, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81318, 2015 WL 3866872

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jun 23, 2015 | Docket: 64302853

Cited 5 times | Published

to each claimant entitled thereto” or $500,000. § 768.73(1). Those cases that have applied the Story standard

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Buonomo

138 So. 3d 1049, 2013 WL 6479415, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 19638

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 11, 2013 | Docket: 60240454

Cited 5 times | Published

court’s order states that, as the result of section 768.73(l)(a)L, Florida Statutes, the punitive damages

Weingrad v. Miles

29 So. 3d 406, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 2535, 2010 WL 711801

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 3, 2010 | Docket: 1134628

Cited 5 times | Published

So.2d at 1357 (where the statute at issue, section 768.73, Florida Statutes (1987), included no legislative

Swanson v. Robles

128 So. 3d 915, 2013 WL 6691122, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 20109

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 20, 2013 | Docket: 60237214

Cited 4 times | Published

the amount of compensatory damages or $500,000. § 768.73(l)(a), Fla. Stat. (2008). Section 768.736 removes

Kintzele v. JB & Sons, Inc.

658 So. 2d 130, 1995 WL 405274

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 11, 1995 | Docket: 439471

Cited 4 times | Published

damages awarded in arbitration are not subject to section 768.73, Florida Statutes (1993), our supreme court

Alamo Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Mancusi

599 So. 2d 1010, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 4313, 1992 WL 79735

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 22, 1992 | Docket: 1484002

Cited 4 times | Published

times the compensatory damage award pursuant to section 768.73(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1989). This section

Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Kayton

104 So. 3d 1145, 2012 WL 5933030, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 20440

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 28, 2012 | Docket: 60227348

Cited 3 times | Published

person entitled thereto” by the trier of fact. § 768.73(l)(a)l., Fla. Stat. (2005). An award of punitive

CSX Transp., Inc. v. Palank

743 So. 2d 556, 1999 WL 641885

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 25, 1999 | Docket: 529732

Cited 3 times | Published

should have granted a remittitur pursuant to section 768.73, Florida Statutes (1995), because the punitive

Neill v. Gulf Stream Coach, Inc.

966 F. Supp. 1149, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13339, 1997 WL 298917

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: May 29, 1997 | Docket: 803484

Cited 3 times | Published

the statute in question here and Fla.Stat. § 768.73, which limits the amount and availability of punitive

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Sheffield

266 So. 3d 1230

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 8, 2019 | Docket: 64708554

Cited 2 times | Published

punitive damages statute is the 1999 version of section 768.73, Florida Statutes, which was in effect when

The L.E. Myers Company v. Young

165 So. 3d 1, 2015 WL 848200

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 27, 2015 | Docket: 2637943

Cited 2 times | Published

punitive damages award to $3.6 million pursuant to section 768.73(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2009). 3

Raymond James Financial Services, Inc. v. Phillips

110 So. 3d 908, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 18182, 2011 WL 5555691

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 16, 2011 | Docket: 60230516

Cited 2 times | Published

“actions.” The Miele court considered whether section 768.73, Florida Statutes (1991), which addressed limitations

Martin Daytona v. Strickland Const. Serv.

941 So. 2d 1220, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 19308, 2006 WL 3327079

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 17, 2006 | Docket: 1523653

Cited 2 times | Published

court in Miele considered the issue whether section 768.73, Florida Statutes (1991), which addressed limitations

Miami Columbus, Inc. v. Ramlawi

687 So. 2d 1378, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 1809, 1996 WL 734498

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 26, 1997 | Docket: 1718518

Cited 2 times | Published

damage awards to three times the compensatory, § 768.73, Fla. Stat. (1995)but before the entry of money

Dom Miele Shirley Miele v. Prudential Bache Securities Roger A. Jones Doug Haas

986 F.2d 459, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 5004, 1993 WL 55653

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Mar 19, 1993 | Docket: 842008

Cited 2 times | Published

General Revenue Fund, pursuant to Fla.Stat.Ann. § 768.73(2) (West Supp.1992) which provides for the splitting

PHILIP MORRIS USA INC. and R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY v. STANLEY MARTIN, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF CAROLE MARTIN

262 So. 3d 769

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 12, 2018 | Docket: 8395134

Cited 1 times | Published

declining to apply the post-1999 version of section 768.73, Florida Statutes, which bars successive awards

Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Naugle

126 So. 3d 1155, 2012 WL 2361748, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 10122

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 22, 2012 | Docket: 60236202

Cited 1 times | Published

times the amount of compensatory damages awarded. § 768.73(l)(a)l., Fla. Stat. (2010). However, where the

316, Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co.

625 F. Supp. 2d 1179, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41049, 2008 WL 2157084

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: May 21, 2008 | Docket: 2268219

Cited 1 times | Published

subject to the limitations set forth in Fla. Stat. § 768.73. ... NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE No act or

Sontag v. STATE DEPT. OF BANKING & FINANCE

669 So. 2d 283, 1996 WL 47673

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 7, 1996 | Docket: 1526217

Cited 1 times | Published

damages in the amount of $475,000.00. Pursuant to section 768.73(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1991),[1] the trial

Christenson & Associates v. Palumbo-Tucker

656 So. 2d 266, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6627, 1995 WL 366368

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 21, 1995 | Docket: 64757159

Cited 1 times | Published

punitive damages under section 768.73(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1993). Section 768.73(l)(a) provides that

Smith v. Prudential Securities Inc.

846 F. Supp. 978, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3430, 1994 WL 96223

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 16, 1994 | Docket: 1276550

Cited 1 times | Published

excess is alleged to be in violation of Fla.Stat. § 768.73(1)(a)(b). However, because Defendant has not alleged

Wannamaker v. Gettings (In Re Gettings)

130 B.R. 353, 1991 Bankr. LEXIS 1172, 1991 WL 155978

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Aug 12, 1991 | Docket: 1397029

Cited 1 times | Published

punitive damages award to $45,000 based on Fla.Stat. § 768.73(1)(a) and (b). The Court also awarded $5,723.27

Monsanto Company v. Lawrence J. Behar

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 11, 2025 | Docket: 70513834

Published

acknowledge Monsanto’s contributions. Citing section 768.73, Florida Statutes, Monsanto further contended

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Lourdes , Jones, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Yolanda Alvarez

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 5, 2024 | Docket: 68829291

Published

in punitive damages. Defendants contend that section 768.73(2), 1 Engle v. Liggett Group, Inc., 945

Stefanny Sommers, etc. v. Philip Morris USA Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 6, 2024 | Docket: 68313506

Published

properly concluded that the current version of section 768.73(2), Florida Statutes, applied to Sommers’ wrongful

Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Odaima Garcia, etc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 15, 2023 | Docket: 68008437

Published

Case; Defendant's Renewed Motion Invoking Section 768.73(2), Florida Statutes; and Motion for Directed

Brinda Coates, etc. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jan 5, 2023 | Docket: 66701383

Published

the first statute, section 768.73, has been substantially amended. See § 768.73, Fla. Stat. (2021).

PHILIP MORRIS USA INC. and R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY v. BRYAN RINTOUL, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Edward Caprio

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 11, 2022 | Docket: 63301697

Published

Damages In 1999, the Legislature amended section 768.73 to prohibit punitive damage awards against

R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY and PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC. v. MYRON KAPLAN, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Sheila Kaplan

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 16, 2022 | Docket: 63162693

Published

argument that punitive damages were barred by section 768.73, Florida Statutes, based on our previous decision

R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY v. SANDRA L. MATTSON, as personal representative of the estate of Eleanor Konzelman

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 16, 2022 | Docket: 63162692

Published

we concluded that the pre-1999 version of section 768.73, Florida Statutes, applies in an Engle progeny

Mary E. Sheffield, etc. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Nov 18, 2021 | Docket: 61531979

Published

broader tort reform act, the Legislature amended section 768.73, Florida Statutes, to among other things presumptively

R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY and PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC. v. MYRON KAPLAN, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Sheila Kaplan

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 23, 2021 | Docket: 60006543

Published

Tobacco’s claim that punitive damages are barred by section 768.73(2)(a), Florida Statutes, based on R.J. Reynolds

JOYCE HARDIN, etc. v. R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 16, 2020 | Docket: 18747977

Published

verdict pursuant to the post-1999 version of section 768.73(2), Florida Statutes. Because we affirm the

Teresa Taylor v. Mentor Worldwide, LLC

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 8, 2019 | Docket: 16307718

Published

defendant’s conduct did in fact harm the claimant.” Id. § 768.73(1). 1. Availability of

R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY v. LESLIE SCHLEFSTEIN, as Personal Representative of the ESTATE OF DAWN SCHLEFSTEIN

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 28, 2019 | Docket: 16121868

Published

that they never invoked the provisions of section 768.73(2), Florida Statutes (2018) in the lower court

THE EVENT DEPOT CORP. v. ROBERT FRANK

269 So. 3d 559

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 24, 2019 | Docket: 14988985

Published

legislature also made substantive revisions to section 768.73, Florida 4 The Florida State University College

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Sheffield

266 So. 3d 1230

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 8, 2019 | Docket: 64708555

Published

punitive damages statute is the 1999 version of section 768.73, Florida Statutes, which was in effect when

PHILIP MORRIS USA INC. and R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY v. STANLEY MARTIN, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF CAROLE MARTIN

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 12, 2018 | Docket: 8421921

Published

declining to apply the post-1999 version of section 768.73, Florida Statutes, which bars successive awards

R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY v. ALAN KONZELMAN, etc.

248 So. 3d 134

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 9, 2018 | Docket: 6521871

Published

Appeal in holding that the pre-1999 version of section 768.73, Florida Statutes, applies in an Engle progeny

Joan Schoeff, etc. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Dec 14, 2017 | Docket: 6241642

Published

three times the compensatory award. See, e.g., § 768.73(1)(a)1., Fla. Stat. (2011). The unreduced compensatory

R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. Andy R. Allen Sr., as Personal Rep. etc.

228 So. 3d 684, 2017 WL 4654900

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 18, 2017 | Docket: 6182889

Published

damages. Chapter 99-225, section 23, amended section 768.73, Florida Statutes, to impose a stricter cap

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. Evers

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 15, 2017 | Docket: 6152930

Published

I. The trial court properly applied section 768.73(1)(a) and (b), Florida Statutes (1995), to

Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Danielson

224 So. 3d 291, 2017 WL 3122200, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 10603

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 24, 2017 | Docket: 60271332

Published

the size of a compensatory damages award. See § 768.73(1)(a)1., Fla. Stat. (defining an excessive award);

Flying Fish Bikes, Inc. v. Giant Bicycle, Inc.

181 F. Supp. 3d 957, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21140, 2016 WL 695972

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 22, 2016 | Docket: 64308506

Published

on punitive damages mirror the language of Section 768.73(1), Florida Statutes, which governs the amount

Brown v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

113 F. Supp. 3d 1233, 2015 WL 3796282, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79980

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jun 18, 2015 | Docket: 64302768

Published

defendant to remitti-tur to that ratio. Fla. Stat. § 768.73. However, even in such a cáse, the plaintiff may

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Buonomo

128 So. 3d 102, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 15117, 2013 WL 5334590

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 25, 2013 | Docket: 60236940

Published

court’s order states that, as the result of section 768.73(l)(a)l., Florida Statutes, the punitive damages

ANTUNEZ v. Whitfield

980 So. 2d 1175, 2008 WL 1733602

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 16, 2008 | Docket: 1417897

Published

1358. In Mancusi, the supreme court found that section 768.73(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1987), which limits

Coral Cadillac, Inc. v. Stephens

867 So. 2d 556, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 2809, 2004 WL 384884

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 3, 2004 | Docket: 64828641

Published

damage award under section 768.73(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1995). Section 768.73, Florida Statutes (1995)

Sun International Bahamas, Ltd. v. Wagner

758 So. 2d 1190, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 5544, 2000 WL 561487

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 10, 2000 | Docket: 64797569

Published

times the compensatory damages) pursuant to section 768.73, Florida Statutes (1997) (the version of the

Lewsadder v. Estate of Lewsadder

757 So. 2d 1221, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 4285, 2000 WL 368932

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 12, 2000 | Docket: 64797285

Published

not a civil action as that term is used in section 768.73 Florida Statutes (1991)). However, section

Ago

Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Mar 27, 2000 | Docket: 3255928

Published

by the statutes addressing punitive damages. Section 768.73, Florida Statutes, contemplates that punitive

Kay v. Romero

721 So. 2d 426, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 15056, 1998 WL 842727

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 2, 1998 | Docket: 64784546

Published

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See § 768.73(l)(a), (b), Fla.Stat. (1997).

Department of Banking & Finance v. Edwards

695 So. 2d 939, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 7503, 1997 WL 361506

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 2, 1997 | Docket: 64774389

Published

court’s final judgment provided: Pursuant to Florida Statute 768.73, in an award of punitive damages, sixty-five

Ago

Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Feb 28, 1996 | Docket: 3258393

Published

damage awards under section 768.73(5), Florida Statutes? In sum: Pursuant to section 768.73(5), Florida Statutes

Don Miele Shirley Miele v. Prudential Bache Securities Roger A. Jones Doug Haas

62 F.3d 1315, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24459, 1995 WL 488550

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 31, 1995 | Docket: 599972

Published

General Revenue Fund, pursuant to Fla.Stat. Ann. § 768.73 (1991). 2 The other check was made

State v. Ferguson Transportation, Inc.

633 So. 2d 127, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 2646, 1994 WL 90371

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 23, 1994 | Docket: 64746828

Published

applicability and effective date of Florida Statutes section 768.73(2)(b) (1993). The State’s interest was predicated

State v. Equipment Enterprises, Inc.

611 So. 2d 1370, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 1467, 1993 WL 20350

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 2, 1993 | Docket: 64693412

Published

interest in a punitive damage award, contravenes section 768.73(4), Florida Statutes (1991),1 and Gordon v

State v. Mancusi

609 So. 2d 177, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12532, 1992 WL 373163

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 16, 1992 | Docket: 64692311

Published

trial. Id. at 1013. We also determined that section 768.73(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1989) did not apply

Myrtle Grove, Inc. v. Taylor

599 So. 2d 771, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6203, 1992 WL 121375

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 5, 1992 | Docket: 64667755

Published

percent of the punitive damage award pursuant to section 768.73, Florida Statutes. Before the State’s motions

Govaert v. First American Bank & Trust Co. (In re Geri Zahn, Inc.)

135 B.R. 912, 16 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 731, 1991 Bankr. LEXIS 1956

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. | Filed: Dec 19, 1991 | Docket: 65780287

Published

contends Florida Statute § 768.73(l)(a) should control. Florida Statute § 768.73 states that “in any civil

Palmer v. Davies

591 So. 2d 237, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 6681, 1991 WL 120812

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 10, 1991 | Docket: 64664201

Published

Medical Assistance Trust Fund as provided in section 768.73(2), Florida Statutes (1989). That statute requires