Customise Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorised as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyse the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customised advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyse the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Weston Hurd logo

Ohio Supreme Court Upholds Requirement that Trial Courts Bifurcate Compensatory and Punitive Damage Phases of Trials Upon Motion

in Insurance, Publications

In a February 15, 2012 decision, Havel v. Villa St. Joseph, 2012-Ohio-552, the Ohio Supreme Court upheld a key component of Ohio’s 2005 tort reform. Specifically, that tort reform included a requirement that trial courts bifurcate the punitive damage phase and evidence in a trial from the compensatory damage phase in a trial upon motion of any party. The obvious purpose of that law was to preclude the plaintiff’s attorney from inflaming the passions of the jury, with evidence that went to the issue of punitive damages, when the jury had not yet made a determination as to the plaintiff’s entitlement to compensatory damages. . . 2012 – Ohio Supreme Court Upholds Requirement that Trial Courts Bifurcate Compensatory and Punitive Damage Phases of Trials Upon Motion