Scarborough v. Dillard's Inc.

Because I believe Bernard Scarborough (“plaintiff’) did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that defendant’s actions constituted willful or wanton conduct or malice warranting punitive damages, I respectfully dissent.

I

The majority states that our standard of review is whether or not a scintilla of evidence existed to support the jury’s award. This is true for our review of the granting of a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. However, per statute, the evidentiary standard for punitive damages is whether the existence of an aggravating factor — fraud, malice, or willful or…