HONDA v. OBERG

Print this Page
Case Basics
Docket No. 
93-644
Petitioner 
Honda
Respondent 
Oberg
Advocates
(Argued the cause for the respondents)
(Argued the cause for the petitioners)
Tags
Term:
Facts of the Case 

Karl Oberg was driving an all-terrain vehicle when it overturned, causing him severe, permanent injuries. The jury in his trial assessed almost $1 million in compensatory damages, and an additional $5 million in punitive damages. A 1910 amendment to the Oregon state constitution prohibited judicial review of jury awards.

Question 

Does the Oregon prohibition on judicial review of jury awards violate the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment?

Conclusion 
Decision: 7 votes for Honda, 2 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Due Process

Yes. The denial of judicial review creates the possibility that juries might make arbitrary and excessive awards without offering a way to adjust them. The common-law practice of allowing judicial review for jury awards is important in ensuring that juries do not ignore guidelines.

Cite this Page
HONDA v. OBERG. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 05 April 2014. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1993/1993_93_644>.
HONDA v. OBERG, The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1993/1993_93_644 (last visited April 5, 2014).
"HONDA v. OBERG," The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, accessed April 5, 2014, http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1993/1993_93_644.