It has to hurt

Re “Law left hanging,” editorial, April 13

The Times’ editorial on the Philip Morris punitive damages award seems to support the Supreme Court’s argument that there should be “a reasonable relationship between the amount of punitive damages and the actual harm to a plaintiff” -- but that runs counter to the whole concept of punitive damages.

To have any meaning or effect, the amount of punitive damages must be decided on the basis of what will discourage the offender from re-offending. In the case of a corporation the size of Philip Morris, this may be a sum that is vastly disproportional to the harm caused to any individual plaintiff.

Elijah Wald

Los Angeles