Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherBrowse by ChannelAbout the NetworkJoin the NetworkProductsSub-MenuProducts OverviewBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAbout UsContactSubscribeSupport
Book a Demo
Search
Close

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA STRIKES DOWN PUNITIVE DAMAGES AWARD ON RES JUDICATA GROUNDS

By Miriam R. Nemetz & Rory K. Schneider on December 11, 2014
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Two Bites on a Red AppleThe U.S. Postal Service advertises that “shipping isn’t complicated.”  Taking a page from the Postal Service’s book, the Supreme Court of Louisiana on Tuesday said much the same thing about res judicata.  In a concise unanimous decision, the court reversed an award of punitive damages against Exxon on res judicata grounds.  The court held that a defendant may not be required to relitigate whether its conduct warrants punitive damages after a jury found in its favor on that very question in an earlier case involving the same plaintiff.

The relevant cases involved exposure to hazardous material at pipeyards in Louisiana.  In the first case, a group of plaintiffs sued Exxon and others for damages  associated with their increased risk of cancer from the exposure.  The jury awarded compensatory damages for that injury but declined to award punitive damages, finding that Exxon had not engaged in wanton or reckless conduct in storing, handling, or transporting the hazardous material.

One plaintiff later developed cancer and brought a second action against Exxon.  The suit involved the same exposure to hazardous material at issue in the first action.  Exxon sought partial summary judgment with respect to punitive damages, arguing that the first jury’s verdict barred the claim.  The trial court denied the motion, and the jury ultimately awarded $10 million in punitive damages against Exxon.

Although it reduced the award for other reasons, the intermediate appellate court agreed with the district court that res judicata did not bar the claim for punitive damages.  It concluded that “exceptional circumstances” justified relitigation of the plaintiff’s entitlement to punitive damages because of the “complexity of and convoluted circumstances involved in the instant case.”  Although it is not entirely clear from the court’s opinion what the court was referring to, it seems to have had in mind Exxon’s statements during the first trial that the plaintiffs could file another suit if they later developed cancer.

The Louisiana Supreme Court reversed.  It emphasized that courts should not refuse to apply res judicata when the doctrine’s requirements are satisfied, except in truly exceptional cases.  In the Court’s view, this case was not exceptional.  Although the plaintiff had reserved the right to sue again if he developed cancer, that “did not change the fact that he fully prosecuted his exemplary damages claim to the [first] jury and the [first] jury . . .  then made a finding that Exxon had not engaged in wanton and reckless conduct” warranting punishment.

The court’s decision is eminently sensible.  Although the plaintiff’s development of a new injury presented new questions related to compensatory damages, it did not do so with respect to punitive damages.  The second jury punished Exxon for exactly the same conduct that the first jury found did not warrant punitive damages under an identical standard.  That should not have happened.

The court’s application of preclusion principles in this case was straightforward.  Whether preclusion should apply in other punitive damages scenarios presents some more complex issues that will be the subject of a forthcoming post.

Photo of Miriam R. Nemetz Miriam R. Nemetz

Miriam Nemetz is a member of the Supreme Court and Appellate Practice in Mayer Brown’s Washington, D. C. office. Miriam has briefed dozens of cases in state and federal appellate courts and the U.S. Supreme Court, and has argued before the US Courts…

Miriam Nemetz is a member of the Supreme Court and Appellate Practice in Mayer Brown’s Washington, D. C. office. Miriam has briefed dozens of cases in state and federal appellate courts and the U.S. Supreme Court, and has argued before the US Courts of Appeals for the D.C., Second, Sixth and Seventh Circuits. Miriam handles a wide variety of appeals but has developed specialized expertise in cases involving punitive damages and employment-related claims. Since 2009, Miriam has been selected by her peers every year for inclusion in The Best Lawyers In America in the specialty of Appellate Law. She is a co-author of Mayer Brown’s Federal Appellate Practice treatise, published by BNA Books in December 2008.

Read Miriam’s full bio.

Read more about Miriam R. NemetzEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Rory K. Schneider Rory K. Schneider

Rory Schneider is a Supreme Court & Appellate associate in Mayer Brown’s New York office. Prior to joining Mayer Brown in 2014, Rory worked as a law clerk to Judge Marjorie O. Rendell of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. He also spent…

Rory Schneider is a Supreme Court & Appellate associate in Mayer Brown’s New York office. Prior to joining Mayer Brown in 2014, Rory worked as a law clerk to Judge Marjorie O. Rendell of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. He also spent a year as a litigation associate at another prominent international law firm based in New York. Rory received his JD, summa cum laude, from the University of Pennsylvania Law School, where he was a comments editor on the Law Review. He received his undergraduate degree from the George Washington University.

Read Rory’s full bio.

Read more about Rory K. SchneiderEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Class Action & Mass Torts
  • Blog:
    Guideposts
  • Organization:
    Mayer Brown

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • Resource Center
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center
  • Blogging 101

New to the Network

  • Through The Immigration Lens
  • Tennessee Insurance Litigation Blog
  • Claims & Sustains
  • New Jersey Restraining Order Lawyers
  • New Jersey Gun Lawyers
Copyright © 2025, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo