What distinguishes punitive damages from compensatory damages in tort law?

• A. Compensatory damages compensate actual loss; punitive damages punish and deter egregious conduct.
• B. Punitive damages compensate actual loss.
• C. Punitive damages are available for all torts; compensatory damages only for intentional torts.
• D. Compensatory damages are only for property damage; punitive for personal injury.

Answer: (A)

The main idea here is that damages in tort serve two different purposes: making the plaintiff whole and deterring truly blameworthy conduct. Compensatory damages are about restoring the plaintiff to the position they were in before the harm, so they cover actual losses like medical bills, lost wages, property repair, and also non-economic harms such as pain and suffering. Punitive damages, on the other hand, aren’t tied to the plaintiff’s losses; they’re meant to punish the wrongdoer for egregious conduct and to deter others from similar behavior. They’re awarded only in exceptional cases and often require a higher level of proof that the conduct was particularly reckless, malicious, or fraudulent.

So the correct distinction is that compensatory damages reimburse actual losses, while punitive damages punish and deter egregious conduct. The other statements misstate these roles: punitive damages aren’t for actual losses, they aren’t automatically available for all torts, and compensatory damages aren’t limited to property damage or to intentional torts alone.