Pacific Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Haslip

Pacific Mutual's (defendant's) insurance agent misappropriated premiums paid by Haslip and others (plaintiffs), leaving Haslip without coverage and facing a medical debt judgment; at trial, the jury was instructed that punitive damages were discretionary and should reflect the character of the wrong and the need for deterrence, and it awarded punitive damages, which the Alabama Supreme Court affirmed after applying detailed reasonableness factors. Pacific Mutual sought Supreme Court review, arguing the jury's broad discretion violated due process.