UIC Law Review Volume 25 Issue 2 Article 9 Winter 1992 Loitz v. Remington Arms Co.: The Illinois Supreme Court Sets a Tougher Standard for Reviewing Punitive Damage Awards in Products Liability Cases, 25 J. Marshall L. Rev. 427 (1992) Eric P. Loukas Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview Part of the Jurisprudence Commons, Litigation Commons, State and Local Government Law Commons, and the Torts Commons Recommended Citation Eric P. Loukas, Loitz v. Remington Arms Co.: The Illinois Supreme Court Sets a Tougher Standard for Reviewing Punitive Damage Awards in Products Liability Cases, 25 J. Marshall L. Rev. 427 (1992) https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview/vol25/iss2/9 This Comments is brought to you for free and open access by UIC Law Open Access Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in UIC Law Review by an authorized administrator of UIC Law Open Access Repository. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. CASENOTE LOITZ v. REMINGTON ARMS CO.:* THE ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT SETS A TOUGHER STANDARD FOR REVIEWING PUNITIVE DAMAGE AWARDS IN PRODUCTS LIABILITY CASES Courts award punitive damages in products liability cases to punish the defendant's conduct and deter the defendant and others from engaging in similar conduct.1 In Illinois, the trial judge ini- * 563 N.E.2d 397 (IM. 1990). 1. Punitive damages have also been referred to as "vindictive" or "exem- plary" damages, or as "smart money" ("smart" as in sting or hurt), and are awarded in tort actions beyond the amount required to compensate the plain- tiff, most often when the defendant's conduct is the result of malice or reckless- ness.