PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 21, 1997
Multiple Punitive Damages Fairness Act of 1997 - Prohibits punitive damages in any civil action in State or Federal court in which such damages are sought against a defendant based on the same act or course of conduct for which punitive damages have already been sought or awarded against such defendant. Permits the court to award such punitive damages, subject to specified limitations, upon determining in a pretrial hearing that the claimant will offer new and substantial evidence of previously undiscovered, additional wrongful behavior on the part of the defendant, other than the injury to the claimant. Directs a court awarding punitive damages pursuant to such provision to: (1) make specific findings of fact on the record to support the award; (2) reduce the amount of the punitive portion of the damage award by the sum of the amounts of punitive damages previously paid by the defendant in prior actions based on the same act or course of conduct; and (3) prohibit disclosure to the jury of the court's determination and action. Makes this Act inapplicable to any civil action involving damages awarded under any Federal or State statute that prescribes the precise amount of punitive damages to be awarded.
People & committees
Sen. Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S454)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.78 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.78 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.78 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.78 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.