Conduct which, although unlawful, is done reasonably and in good faith is the antithesis of conduct warranting exemplary damages. An assessing judge on remittal is bound by unchallenged findings of fact made by the primary judge and cannot make findings inconsistent with them. Exemplary damages cannot be awarded on a basis of direct institutional liability when only vicarious liability was pleaded. Aggravated damages generally require direct evidence from the plaintiff of subjective insult or humiliation and cannot ordinarily be inferred from objective circumstances alone.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.