Page 7 - The Katten Kattwalk - Summer 2025 - Issue 29
P. 7
Second, the court examined the ratio of punitive disproportionate to, potential statutory fines or
damages to compensatory damages. Gore does not penalties for similar conduct. In Curry, the Seventh
mandate a strict mathematical formula but looks Circuit determined that the $900,000 total punitive
for any “gross disproportion” relative to the harm award (spread among multiple defendants) did
suffered. In Curry, the court included disgorged not exceed what state statutes might reasonably
profits in the denominator when assessing impose in analogous cases and was thus not
compensatory damages because the profits award unconstitutionally excessive.
served to approximate the magnitude of the By affirming the jury’s verdict under these three
injury. Once disgorgement was added to the actual guideposts, the Seventh Circuit reinforced that
damages, the resulting punitive-to-compensatory state-law punitive damages can remain within due
ratio remained within acceptable bounds. This process constraints when the defendant’s conduct
holistic approach — treating disgorgement as part is particularly willful, the punitive-to-compensatory
of the “harm” measure — was key to upholding ratio is not extreme and the award aligns with
the constitutional validity of the punitive damages analogous civil penalties.
award.
Comparisons with Prior Appellate Rulings
Third, the court measured the punitive figure
against analogous civil penalties under relevant Punitive damages have historically been viewed as
state law. Gore instructs courts to see whether an unavailable under the Lanham Act, as illustrated
award is consistent with, or at least not grossly by the following decisions. The Second Circuit in
7
