US Supreme Court case Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker

E682976

Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker is a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly limited punitive damages awarded against Exxon for the Exxon Valdez oil spill, shaping modern maritime and punitive damages law.

All labels observed (1)

How this entity was disambiguated

Statements (49)

Predicate Object
instanceOf United States Supreme Court case ⓘ
maritime law case ⓘ
punitive damages case ⓘ
affectedParty Alaska Native communities ⓘ
linked to: Alaska Natives

Exxon Mobil Corporation shareholders ⓘ
commercial fishermen in Alaska ⓘ
appliesTo federal maritime cases ⓘ
aroseFromDate March 24, 1989 ⓘ
aroseFromEvent Exxon Valdez oil spill ⓘ
aroseFromLocation Prince William Sound, Alaska ⓘ
citation 554 U.S. 471 ⓘ
concurrenceBy Justice John Paul Stevens ⓘ
linked to: John Paul Stevens

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ
linked to: Ruth Bader Ginsburg
decisionDate June 25, 2008 ⓘ
docketNumber 07-219 ⓘ
doesNotRestOn Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution ⓘ
linked to: Due Process Clause
hasCourt Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
hasPetitioner Exxon Shipping Company ⓘ
hasRespondent Grant Baker ⓘ
other commercial fishermen and private parties ⓘ
holding In maritime cases, punitive damages may not exceed compensatory damages in a 1:1 ratio absent exceptional circumstances defined by Congress ⓘ
Punitive damages in this case were reduced to $507.5 million to match compensatory damages ⓘ
The $2.5 billion punitive damages award against Exxon was excessive under federal maritime common law ⓘ
impact influenced later punitive damages jurisprudence in federal and state courts ⓘ
significantly limited punitive damages exposure for maritime defendants ⓘ
issue Whether Exxon could be held vicariously liable for punitive damages based on the conduct of the ship’s captain ⓘ
Whether federal maritime law imposes limits on punitive damages ⓘ
Whether the punitive damages award against Exxon for the Exxon Valdez spill was excessive under maritime law ⓘ
joinedByInMajority Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. ⓘ
linked to: John G. Roberts Jr.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy ⓘ
linked to: Anthony M. Kennedy

Justice Antonin Scalia ⓘ
linked to: Antonin Scalia

Justice Clarence Thomas ⓘ
linked to: Clarence Thomas

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. ⓘ
linked to: Samuel A. Alito Jr.

Justice Stephen G. Breyer ⓘ
linked to: Stephen G. Breyer
jurisdiction federal maritime jurisdiction ⓘ
legalArea federal common law ⓘ
maritime law ⓘ
punitive damages ⓘ
majorityOpinionBy Justice David H. Souter ⓘ
linked to: David H. Souter
originatedFrom United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ⓘ
United States District Court for the District of Alaska ⓘ
relatedCase BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore ⓘ
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Campbell ⓘ
relatedEvent Exxon Valdez grounding on Bligh Reef ⓘ
linked to: Exxon Valdez
restsOn federal maritime common law authority of the Supreme Court ⓘ
result established a 1:1 ceiling on punitive-to-compensatory damages ratio in maritime cases under federal common law ⓘ
punitive damages award substantially reduced ⓘ
ruledOn vicarious corporate liability for punitive damages in maritime cases ⓘ
voteSplit 5-3 on punitive damages ratio rule ⓘ

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (1)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Exxon Valdez oil spill → legalOutcome → US Supreme Court case Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker ⓘ