{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013595166163141994, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.5, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Health care litigation: assuring consistency and proportionality in punitive damages awards.

This article, the ninth in a series on health care litigation, explains possible reforms that could be implemented to prevent juries from awarding unreasonable and unfair amounts of punitive damages. One way to minimize this problem would be to establish a system that promotes consistency in punitive damages awards. Another reform would involve instituting mechanisms to ensure proportionality in punitive damages awards. This article explores the steps involved in establishing a new system, and the benefit to defendants if the punitive damages system is reformed.