Replies

The way I read it judge Holland was the judge in the case of Baker vs. Exxon, is that what you mean by “Holland getting the ball rolling?”

Here’s another excerpt and link from the Maryland Attorney Generals office:

“In 1994, in the case of Baker vs. Exxon, an Anchorage jury awarded $287 million for actual damages (later increased to $504 million) and $5 billion for punitive damages. Exxon appealed the ruling, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ordered the original judge to reduce the punitive damages. In December 2002, the judge announced that he had reduced the damages to $4 billion. Exxon appealed again, sending the case back to court to be considered in regard to a recent Supreme Court ruling. Punitive damages were increased to $4.5 billion, plus interest.”

http://www.oag.state.md.us/Press/2008/013008a.htm

What am I missing? Judge Holland was doing what the appeals court told him to do and then later upped the punitive damage award because of a recent SCOTUS decision.

Then later SCOTUS reduced the award in a ruling and Holland had nothing to do with that.