Johnson v. Ford Motor Co.

Good Law
135 Cal. App. 4th 137·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 1969·2005 Daily Journal DAR 14824·37 Cal. Rptr. 3d 283·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10848
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 23, 2005F040188, F040529California4,410 words

Opinion

Opinion

Vartabedian, J.

I.

Introduction

In our previous, unpublished opinion in this case, filed November 25, 2003, we held that the $10 million punitive damages verdict against defendant Ford Motor Company was based on an impermissible theory of recovery and was, in addition, constitutionally excessive. We concluded the maximum constitutionally permissible punitive damages award was $53,435, or three times the compensatory damages ($17,811.60) awarded by the jury.

Plaintiffs Greg and Jo Ann Johnson petitioned for review by the Supreme Court. The court granted the petition. Although the court agreed with our conclusions that the punitive damages award was based on an impermissible theory and that the verdict was constitutionally excessive, the court reversed the judgment of this court and remanded the matter “for a new determination of the maximum constitutional award” of punitive damages in accordance with a “correct understanding of the law” as expressed in the Supreme Court’s decision. (Johnson v. Ford Motor Co. (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1191, 1213 [ 29 Cal.Rptr.3d 401 ] (Johnson).)

II.

Facts and Procedural History

A. The Plaintiffs’ Transaction

The facts were thoroughly summarized in the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.