No Punitive Damages May be Awarded Against an Estate for Dog Bite Claim against Deceased Defendant
Veronica Maciag, a minor, was attacked by a pit bull owned by the decedent defendant, Kenneth Kantor. There had been prior incidents involving this dog, in which the dog had escaped and bitten people. The minor filed suit against Kantor to recover for her injuries. After the lawsuit was filed, Kantor passed away and his estate was substituted in as a defendant. In Maciag v. Kantor, docket no. BER-5878-11 (June 25, 2014 Law Div.), the trial court judge was asked to rule on a motion filed by the defendant Estate to dismiss the punitive damages claim asserted against the defendant.
The defendant argued that the purpose of punitive damages is to punish and deter the wrongdoer only. Given that the defendant is now deceased, the defendant Estate contended that the punitive damages claim must be dismissed, because the defendant can no longer be punished or deterred from his alleged egregious acts.
Plaintiff opposed the motion, arguing that the defendant was clearly aware of the dog’s propensity to escape and bite others. Also, the case had previously been listed for trial and plaintiff argued that, had the case been tried previously, the defendant would have still been alive. Further, the plaintiff contended that an estate assumes the liabilities of its decedent in numerous scenarios. Thus, plaintiff’s position was that, just because the defendant was now deceased, that should not change the defendant’s liability for punitive damages.
The trial judge was faced with deciding whether a claim for punitive damages survives the death of the defendant. The court pointed out that the New Jersey Punitive Damages Act allows punitive damages to be awarded for the purpose of punishing and thereby deterring only the wrongdoer.
While this was a novel claim in New Jersey, 32 other jurisdictions confronting this same issue have held that punitive damages may not be awarded against a decedent’ estate. Hence, consistent with the purposes of the Act, the trial court found that punitive damages may not be pursued against a deceased defendant and granted the Estates’ motion to dismiss the punitive damages claim.
redbanknaacp
Stephen Gilbert
Tom Begley
Random Question: My name is Paul and I’m an attorney in Bergen County. I actually may have a similar situation where the firm represents a Defendant who probably will pass away prior to end of litigation and Plaintiff is seeking punitive damages. I agree that punitive damages should not be awarded if the defendant has passed. I’m trying to get more information about this case. Do you know which judge handled it? Attorney? I’d love to see the opinion if possible