719 F.Supp.3d 759
E.D. Mich.2024Background
- Plaintiff Tina McPherson sued Suburban Ann Arbor, LLC, a car dealership, over an auto sale involving a "yo-yo" or bait-and-switch financing scheme.
- The defendant attempted to renegotiate finance terms after initially selling the vehicle and eventually repossessed it when McPherson refused the new terms.
- Jury verdict found in favor of McPherson on federal and Michigan state law claims, awarding $15,000 actual damages, $23,000 for conversion, and $350,000 punitive damages.
- Post-verdict, McPherson moved for enhanced (treble) damages, prejudgment interest, and immediate enforcement of the judgment.
- The court addressed whether to multiply damages based on statutory language, the appropriateness of prejudgment interest, and whether to lift the standard 30-day stay of execution on judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trebling damages under MRCPA & Conversion | Trebling mandatory or appropriate given the willful, egregious conduct. | Trebling is discretionary, punitive damages already serve deterrence, no further multiplication. | Trebling denied; punitive damages sufficient. |
| Prejudgment interest | Should be awarded on all claims, from proper accrual dates. | Only required on conversion claim under state law; otherwise, discretionary and not warranted. | Prejudgment interest granted on all claims. |
| Immediate enforcement of judgment | Judgment should be enforceable immediately due to risk of asset dissipation. | No evidence of asset dissipation; standard stay should apply. | Immediate enforcement denied; stay applies. |
| Application of punitive damages ratio | Large punitive award justified by defendant's conduct and applicable standards. | Ratio (over 9x actual damages) skirts due process limits; large punitive award already excessive. | Award stands for now, but may revisit if remittitur addressed. |
Key Cases Cited
- BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, 517 U.S. 559 (limits on punitive damages ratios under due process)
- State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408 (few punitive damages awards exceeding single-digit ratios survive due process)
- Browning-Ferris Indus. of Vt., Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc., 492 U.S. 257 (explains purposes of punitive damages)
- Bricklayers’ Pension Tr. Fund v. Taiariol, 671 F.2d 988 (prejudgment interest generally discretionary absent statute)
- City of Milwaukee v. Cement Div., Nat. Gypsum Co., 515 U.S. 189 (rationale for prejudgment interest is full compensation for loss)