ÿWPC! =UBf %¨®b¶ B¾ 0CÛ#  0”)½n®Í 04{w@¯4ï 0J 0TM 0^¡ ÿ 0h 0rm AQß Æ0 0Dö 0@: 0Dz 0|¾ D/: 0†i Bï D3  0? 1uÏ 0dDU6¨U.ÞU * B)6DC_ AM¢ïý›v~°vÓ.<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX- ù- d(ÿÿ$òòÚ  ÚÚ  Úóó˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(D(2Q$¤¤Ý ƒ ¤T!ÝÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°Òà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó3|x¦ «<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxþ6X@ÉJQX@(ä2AArialBoldTT10cpi¼¼pä2p± NQ¼(ä2AArialBoldTT10cpiXX`ä2p± NQX<þ6X9`(*Courier 10pt12cpiøødþ6X@É?BQø@( ¤T$¡¡Ó  Ó ‡ ˆ E‰ Ó€• – — ‚˜ ™™ ™š Ó€¦ WX$‹"Ar2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔH!26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô !"#%Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ !ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô'''÷ÿ dxd2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔüÿP Pd'ÿÿdxd2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô$&) ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Courier New< Œ 9p`(Courier< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d55557Border 1dd "6Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ !ÝÑ  ÑÔ€2ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ!"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€4ÔÔ€4ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€4XÔÌÌò òJune€22,€1998ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€4ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó Ý ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€2ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÔ€4Ô€€Ô€4ôÔThe€complaint€also€named€Charles€Pruitt€and€the€law€office€of€Pruitt€&€Waters€as€defendantsÏbased€on€theories€of€respondeat€superior€and€partnership€liability.€€The€jury€found€that€Pruitt€andÏWaters€were€partners€and€that€both€were€jointly€and€severally€liable€for€the€compensatory€damages.€ÏThese€issues€are€not€before€us€in€this€appeal.Ì ‘Ý ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€2ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÔ€4ÔÔ€4ôÔ€òòSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,€òòHyatt€Regency€v.€Winston€&€Strawnóó,€907€P.2d€506,€518€(Ariz.€Ct.€App.€1995)Ï(ð ðaggravated€or€outrageous€conductðð);€òòOrsini€v.€Larry€Moyer€Trucking,€Inc.óó,€833€S.W.2d€366,€368€(Ark.Ï1992)(wanton€conduct;€conscious€indifference;€malice);€òòMiller€v.€Byrneóó,€916€P.2d€566,€580€(Colo.€Ct.ÏApp.€1995)(ð ðwillful€and€wantonðð);€òòRay„Mar€Beauty€College,€Inc.€v.€Ellis€Rubin€Law€Officesóó,€475€So.2dÏ718,€719€(Fla.€Dist.€Ct.€App.€1985)(ð ðgross€malpracticeðð);€òòHouston€v.€Surrettóó,€474€S.E.2d€39,€41€(Ga.ÏCt.€App.€1996)(ð ðwillful€misconduct,€malice,€fraud,€wantonness,€oppressionðð);€òòFitzgerald€v.€Walkeróó,€826ÏP.2d€1301,€1305€(Idaho€1992)(ð ðextreme€deviation€from€reasonable€standards€of€conductðð);€òòBelford€v.ÏMcHale,€Cook€&€Welchóó,€648€N.E.2d€1241,€1245€(Ind.€Ct.€App.€1995)(ð ðmalice,€fraud,€grossÏnegligence,€or€oppressivenessðð);€òòMcAlister€v.€Slosbergóó,€658€A.2d€658€(Me.€1995)(malice);€òòGautam€v.ÏDeLucaóó,€521€A.2d€1343,€1347€(N.J.€Super.€1987)(wanton,€reckless€or€malice;€consciousÏwrongdoing);€òòbutóó€òòseeóó€òòCripe€v.€Leiteróó,€683€N.E.2d€516€(Ill.€App.€Ct.€1997)(discussing€statute€whichÏprecluded€punitive€damages€for€attorney€malpractice).€€ÌPtPtHHØ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ellan Geneva ÒÒ  ellan Geneva ÒÝ ƒ !ÝÔ . ÔÔ€2ÔÝ  ÝÒ € ÒÒ „ ÒØ ØÓ&€33XÐd&ÓÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€4Ô›œ›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌà@ àÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€ò ò€òòFOR€PUBLICATIONóóó óÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÔ% € Ô€€ò òòòFiled:€€€June€22,€1998óóó óÌBILLIE€J.€METCALFE,à àà àà à)à àÌJULIA€M.€METCALFE,€andà àà à)ÌJOHNNY€D.€METCALFE,à àà àà à)à à€€€€€SHELBY€CIRCUITÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìœ›à àPlaintiffs/Appellants,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌVs.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€J.€STEVEN€STAFFORD,ÌÙ€ Ùœ›œßR€786A1-j|ñ` Å `€€@ÿRß›à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àà à€JUDGEÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌLARRY€J.€WATERS,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àDefendant,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìandà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌCHARLES€W.€PRUITT,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€€02S01„9704„CV„00027Ìà àDefendant/Appellee.à àà à)à àÌÌœÌÌ›ÌÌòòò òFor€Appellants€Metcalfe:ó óà àà àà àà àò òFor€Appellee,€CharlesÏW.€Pruitt:ó óóóÌR.€Sadler€Baileyà àà àà àà àà àRobert€C.€RosenbushÌœC.€Philip€M.€Campbellà àà àà àà àMillington,€TennesseeÌBAILEY€&€CLARKE›à àà àà àà àœ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€›ÌœMemphis,€Tennessee›Ìœ›ÌÌÌò òòòà àà àà àFor€Defendant,€Larry€J.€Waters:ó óóóÌà àà àà àPaul€E.€Lewisà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àMillington,€TennesseeÌÌÌÌÌÌò òÔ€4„Ôà@ àO€€€P€€€I€€€N€€€I€€€O€€€Nó óÌÔ€4XÔÌÌÌÌœÌCOURT›€OF€APPEALS€AFFIRMED€ÌIN€PART€AND€REVERSED€IN€PART;€ÌREMANDED€TO€TRIAL€COURTà àà àà àà àà àANDERSON,€C.J.ÇÑ€ÑÑ7€¢XXdÈXXdÈ7ÑÓÓà àWe€granted€this€appeal€to€determine€whether€the€Court€of€Appeals€erred€inÏreversing€the€juryððs€verdict€awarding€punitive€damages€in€this€legal€malpracticeÏaction.€€The€appeals€court€held€that€punitive€damages€were€improper€because€theÏdefendantððs€malpractice€did€not€constitute€intentional,€fraudulent,€malicious€orÏreckless€conduct€and€because€the€defendantððs€efforts€to€conceal€his€actions€wereÏnot€contemporaneous€with€his€malpractice.€€The€court€affirmed€the€juryððs€verdictÏas€to€liability,€but€reversed€the€juryððs€verdict€as€to€compensatory€damagesÏbecause€it€was€excessive.€€ÌÌà àAfter€our€review€of€the€record€and€applicable€authority,€we€hold€that€as€toÏpunitive€damages,€the€evidence€supported€a€finding€that€the€defendant€engagedÏin€intentional,€fraudulent,€malicious,€or€reckless€conduct€and€that€there€is€noÏrequirement€that€a€defendantððs€attempts€to€lie€about€or€conceal€his€conduct€mustÏbe€contemporaneous€with€the€underlying€malpractice.€€The€judgment€of€the€CourtÏof€Appeals€is€therefore€reversed€in€part€and€the€juryððs€verdict€as€to€punitiveÏdamages€is€reinstated.€€The€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€a€new€trialÏsolely€on€the€issue€of€compensatory€damages€for€the€reasons€expressed€by€theÏCourt€of€Appeals.€€ÌÌà@ àò òòòBACKGROUNDóóó óÌà àIn€September€of€1986,€the€plaintiff,€Billie€Metcalfe,€was€a€passenger€in€aÏcar€that€was€involved€in€a€head„on€collision€with€another€automobile.€€Metcalfe,Íwho€was€age€16€at€the€time,€suffered€a€broken€leg,€a€concussion,€facial€cuts,€andÏhad€to€have€a€pin€surgically€placed€in€her€hip.€€She€spent€thirteen€days€in€theÏhospital.ÌÌà àThe€plaintiff€and€her€parents,€Julia€and€Johnny€Metcalfe,€later€hired€theÏdefendant,€Larry€Waters,€to€represent€them€in€connection€with€the€accident.€€InÏSeptember€of€1987,€Waters€filed€a€complaint€against€the€driver€of€the€vehicleÏBillie€Metcalfe€had€been€riding€in,€the€driverððs€parents,€and€several€otherÏdefendants.€€The€complaint€was€non„suited€by€Waters€on€March€15,€1990,Ïbecause€Waters€was€not€prepared€on€the€day€of€trial.€€The€complaint€was€re„filedÏon€March€6,€1991;€however,€Waters€did€not€pay€the€filing€fee,€nor€did€he€properlyÏissue€summons.ÌÌà àThe€complaint€was€dismissed€by€the€trial€court€against€some€of€theÏdefendants€in€December€of€1992,€due€to€the€expiration€of€the€statute€of€limitations.€ÏIt€was€dismissed€as€to€the€remaining€defendants€on€May€14,€1993,€when€WatersÏfailed€to€appear€for€the€trial.€€Waters€lied€to€the€plaintiffs€about€the€status€of€theÏcase€for€several€months,€telling€them€that€it€was€still€pending€even€though€heÏknew€it€had€been€dismissed.€€When€he€finally€informed€the€Metcalfes€that€the€caseÏhad€been€dismissed,€he€did€not€state€the€reason€for€the€dismissal€butÏnevertheless€told€them€it€was€not€worth€appealing.ÌÌà àThe€Metcalfes€initiated€a€legal€malpractice€suit€against€Waters.× ƒ9 ××  ×€€In€hisÏamended€answer€to€the€complaint€and€in€his€testimony,€Waters€admitted€that€heÏfailed€to€apprise€the€plaintiffs€of€the€status€of€their€case,€failed€to€adequatelyÏprepare€for€trial,€failed€to€refile€the€suit€properly€after€taking€a€non„suit,€failed€to€fileÏsummons€properly,€failed€to€appear€the€second€time€the€case€was€set€for€trial,€andÏfailed€to€file€a€notice€of€appeal€on€behalf€of€the€plaintiffs.€€Waters€conceded€thatÏhis€failure€to€inform€the€plaintiffs€that€the€case€had€been€dismissed€was€anÏintentional,€fraudulent,€malicious,€or€reckless€effort€to€conceal€his€mistakes.€€HeÏnonetheless€denied€that€punitive€damages€were€warranted.ÌÌà àAt€trial,€the€trial€court€directed€a€verdict€for€the€plaintiffs€on€liability.€€The€jury,Ïhaving€been€instructed€on€the€law,€returned€a€verdict€that€included€$100,000€inÏpunitive€damages€against€Waters.€€In€approving€the€verdict,€the€trial€court€foundÏthat€ð ðthe€conduct€of€the€defendant€Waters€in€not€keeping€the€plaintiffs€informedÏabout€the€status€of€their€case€and€of€lying€to€the€plaintiffs€about€the€dismissal€is€theÏgravamen€of€the€punitive€damage€award.ðð€€The€trial€court€also€stressed€thatÏWaters€ð ðdid€not€take€any€action€to€set€aside€the€dismissal€of€the€case€or€to€protectÏhis€clientsðð€interests€after€the€case€was€dismissed.ððÌÌà àIn€reversing€the€trial€court,€the€Court€of€Appeals€found€that€WatersððÏmalpractice€amounted€to€negligent€conduct€and€not€intentional,€fraudulent,Ïmalicious€or€reckless€conduct.€€Although€the€intermediate€court€also€found€that€theÏdefendantððs€effort€to€conceal€his€malpractice€was€ð ðegregious,ðð€it€could€not€serveÏas€the€basis€for€punitive€damages:ÌÓÓà8 àÌà8 àà8 à[A]n€award€of€punitive€damages€must€be€made€on€theÏbasis€of€the€same€conduct€that€warrants€an€award€ofÏcompensatory€damages.€€In€the€case€before€us,Ïcompensatory€damages€were€awarded€for€theÏnegligent€conduct€of€Waters€in€allowing€the€dismissalÏof€the€underlying€case.€€Subsequent€to€this€negligentÏconduct,€Waters€committed€the€egregious€act€of€lying€toÏthe€Metcalfes€about€the€dismissal€of€the€case.€ÏCertainly,€his€conduct€after€the€dismissal€of€the€caseÏcannot€be€condoned,€but€at€the€same€time€it€is€conductÏthat€was€not€included€in€the€negligent€act€or€acts€thatÏresulted€in€the€award€of€compensatory€damages.ÌÌÓÓÌà àWe€granted€the€plaintiffsðð€application€for€permission€to€appeal.€€ÌÌà@ àò òòòANALYSISó óóóÌà àThis€Court€historically€has€recognized€that€ð ðin€an€action€of€trespass€the€juryÏ[is]€not€restrained,€in€their€assessment€of€damages,€to€the€amount€of€the€mereÏpecuniary€loss€sustained€by€the€plaintiff,€òòbut€may€award€damages€in€respect€of€theÏmalicious€conduct€of€the€defendant,€and€the€degree€of€insult€with€which€theÏtrespass€had€been€attendedóó.ðð€€òòWilkins€v.€Gilmoreóó,€21€Tenn.€140€(1840)(emphasisÍadded).€€The€purpose€of€such€damages€is€not€to€compensate€the€plaintiff€but€toÏpunish€the€wrongdoer€for€conduct€that€is€egregious€and€to€deter€others€fromÏengaging€in€similar€conduct.€€òòHuckeby€v.€Spangleróó,€563€S.W.2d€555,€558€(Tenn.Ï1978).ÌÌà àIn€òòHodges€v.€S.€C.€Toof€&€Co.óó,€833€S.W.2d€896€(Tenn.€1992),€we€traced€theÏhistory€of€our€case€law€and€determined€that€punitive€damages€are€only€availableÏwhere€a€defendant€has€acted€either€intentionally,€fraudulently,€maliciously€orÏrecklessly.€€We€explained:ÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 àA€person€acts€intentionally€when€it€is€the€personððsÏconscious€objective€or€desire€to€engage€in€the€conductÏor€cause€the€result.€€A€person€acts€fraudulently€whenÏ(1)€the€person€intentionally€misrepresents€an€existing,Ïmaterial€fact€or€produces€a€false€impression,€in€order€toÏmislead€another€or€to€obtain€an€undue€advantage,€andÏ(2)€another€is€injured€because€of€reasonable€relianceÏupon€that€representation.€€A€person€acts€maliciouslyÏwhen€the€person€is€motivated€by€ill€will,€hatred,€orÏpersonal€spite.€€A€person€acts€recklessly€when€theÏperson€is€aware€of,€but€consciously€disregards,€aÏsubstantial€and€unjustifiable€risk€of€such€a€nature€thatÏits€disregard€constitutes€a€gross€deviation€from€theÏstandard€of€care€that€an€ordinary€person€wouldÏexercise€under€all€the€circumstances.ÌÌÌÓÓòòIdóó.€at€901€(citations€omitted).€€ÌÌà àTo€achieve€the€twin€purposes€of€punishment€and€deterrence,€theÏdefendantððs€conduct€must€be€established€by€ð ðclear€and€convincingðð€evidence.€€InÏdetermining€òòliabilityóó€for€punitive€damages,€evidence€of€the€defendantððs€financialÏcondition€is€inadmissible.€€òòIdóó.€€In€determining€the€òòamountóó€of€punitive€damages,€theÏfollowing€factors€may€be€considered€in€a€separate,€bifurcated€proceeding:€theÏdefendantððs€financial€condition€and€net€worth;€the€nature€and€reprehensibility€ofÏthe€defendantððs€conduct;€the€impact€of€the€defendantððs€conduct€on€the€plaintiff;€theÏrelationship€of€the€defendant€to€the€plaintiff;€the€defendantððs€awareness€of€theÏharm€and€motivation€in€causing€the€harm;€the€duration€of€the€defendantððsÏmisconduct€and€òòwhether€the€defendant€attempted€to€conceal€the€conductóó;€theÏexpense€the€plaintiff€has€incurred€in€recovering€any€losses;€whether€theÏdefendant€profited€from€the€conduct,€and€if€so,€whether€damages€in€excess€of€theÏprofit€are€necessary€to€deter€future€conduct;€whether€the€defendant€has€beenÏsubjected€to€previous€punitive€damage€awards€based€upon€the€same€wrongfulÏact;€and€whether€the€defendant€made€any€effort€to€take€remedial€action€or€to€offerÏa€fair€and€prompt€settlement€for€the€actual€harm€caused.€€òòIdóó.€at€901„902€(emphasisÏadded).ÌÌà àIn€the€present€case,€the€Court€of€Appeals€reversed€the€juryððs€award€ofÏpunitive€damages,€finding€that€Watersðð€malpractice€amounted€to€negligence€andÏnot€intentional,€fraudulent,€malicious,€or€reckless€conduct.€€The€court€further€statedÏthat€Watersðð€conduct€in€concealing€and€lying€about€his€malpractice,€althoughÍð ðegregious,ðð€was€not€contemporaneous€with€the€underlying€malpractice€and€wasÏtherefore,€under€òòHodgesóó,€relevant€only€to€the€amount€of,€but€not€the€liability€for,Ïpunitive€damages.€€We€disagree€with€both€conclusions.ÌÌà àA€majority€of€jurisdictions€have€recognized€that€punitive€damages€may€beÏproper€in€a€legal€malpractice€case.€€Annotation,€òòAllowance€of€Punitive€DamagesÏAgainst€Attorney€For€Malpracticeóó,€13€A.L.R.€4th€95€(1982€&€Supp.€1997);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóóÏòòElliott€v.€Videanóó,€791€P.2d€639,€644€(Ariz.€Ct.€App.€1989)(ð ðpunitive€damages€haveÏhistorically€been€awarded€against€attorneys€for€legal€malpracticeðð).€€As€in€anyÏcase€involving€punitive€damages,€however,€the€plaintiff€must€prove€that€theÏdefendant€engaged€in€the€requisite€culpable€conduct.€€The€Alabama€SupremeÏCourt€has€said,€for€instance,€that€ð ðsome€showing€of€fraudulent,€malicious,€willful,Ïwanton,€or€reckless€behavior€or€inaction€must€be€made€to€support€a€claim€forÏpunitive€damages€in€a€legal€malpractice€case.ðð€€òòBoros€v.€Baxleyóó,€621€So.2d€240,Ï245€(Ala.€1993).€€Other€courts€have€used€similar€terms€in€describing€the€culpableÍconduct€for€an€award€of€punitive€damages€in€a€legal€malpractice€case.œ× ƒ: ××  ×›ÌÌà àWe€join€these€jurisdictions€in€recognizing€that€punitive€damages€may€beÏawarded€in€a€legal€malpractice€claim,€provided€the€culpable€conduct€establishedÏin€òòHodgesóó,€òòsupraóó,€i.e.,€intentional,€fraudulent,€malicious,€or€reckless,€is€proven€byÏclear€and€convincing€evidence.€€In€this€regard,€we€disagree€with€the€intermediateÏcourtððs€conclusion€that€Watersðð€conduct€was€merely€negligent.€€In€addition€toÏfailing€to€prosecute€the€Metcalfesðð€claim,€Watersðð€failed€to€keep€them€informedÏabout€the€status€of€their€lawsuit,€failed€to€prepare€when€the€case€was€set€for€trial,Ïfailed€to€re„file€the€case€properly€after€taking€a€nonsuit,€failed€to€pay€the€filing€fee,Ïfailed€to€issue€summons€properly,€failed€to€appear€when€the€case€was€set€aÏsecond€time€for€trial,€failed€to€file€a€notice€of€appeal,€and€failed€to€take€any€actionsÏin€an€effort€to€preserve€the€Metcalfesðð€right€of€appeal.€€Given€Watersðð€repeatedÏtransgressions€and€callous€disregard€for€the€rights€of€his€clients,€there€wasÏoverwhelming€evidence€from€which€the€jury€could€find,€at€a€minimum,€recklessÍconduct,€that€is,€conduct€constituting€a€gross€deviation€from€the€applicableÏstandard€of€care.€€òòSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,€òòPatrick€v.€Ronald€Williams€P.A.óó,€402€S.E.2d€452,€460Ï(N.C.€Ct.€App.€1991)(ð ðrepeated€course€of€conduct€which€constituted€a€callous€orÏintentional€indifference€to€the€plaintiffððs€rightsðð€stated€a€claim€for€punitiveÏdamages).ÌÌà àWe€also€disagree€with€the€conclusion€that€punitive€damages€wereÏimproper€because€Watersðð€malpractice€was€not€contemporaneous€with€his€effortsÏto€lie€about€and€conceal€his€wrongdoing.€€Although€the€Court€of€Appeals€correctlyÏobserved€that€the€concealment€of€wrongdoing€is€listed€among€the€factors€inÏòòHodgesóó€that€may€be€considered€in€determining€the€òòamountóó€of€punitive€damages,Ïnothing€in€òòHodgesóó€precludes€the€factor€from€being€considered€with€regard€to€aÏdefendantððs€òòliabilityóó€for€punitive€damages.€€Indeed,€other€factors€listed€amongÏthose€for€consideration€with€respect€to€the€amount€of€punitive€damages€are€alsoÏnecessarily€considered€with€respect€to€the€threshold€liability€issue;€for€instance,Ïthe€ð ðnature€and€reprehensibility€of€the€defendantððs€wrongdoing.ðð€€òòHodgesóó,€833ÏS.W.2d€at€901.€€A€close€reading€of€òòHodgesóó,€in€fact,€indicates€that€only€evidence€ofÏa€defendantððs€net€worth€or€financial€condition€is€deemed€inadmissible€inÏdetermining€a€defendantððs€liability€for€punitive€damages.€€òòIdóó.€at€901„902.€€€ÌÌà àFinally,€we€believe€that€limiting€consideration€of€a€defendantððs€efforts€toÏconceal€his€or€her€wrongdoing€is€inconsistent€with€the€purpose€of€punitiveÍdamages:€to€punish€egregious€acts€and€deter€others€from€committing€the€same€orÏsimilar€acts.€€As€other€courts€have€recognized,€an€attorneyððs€concealment€ofÏwrongdoing€and/or€misrepresentations€affecting€the€clientððs€case€relate€directly€toÏthe€punitive€damages€issue.€€òòSeeóó,€òòe.g.óó,€òòHouston€v.€Surrettóó,€474€S.E.2d€39,€41€(Ga.ÏCt.€App.€1996)€(ð ðan€attorneyððs€concealment€and€misrepresentation€of€mattersÏaffecting€his€clientððs€case€will€give€rise€to€a€claim€for€punitive€damages.ðð);€òòAsphaltÏEngineers,€Inc.€v.€Galushaóó,€770€P.2d€1180€(Ariz.€Ct.€App.€1989)(ð ðthe€record€alsoÏsupports€an€inference€that€[the€attorney]€attempted€to€cover€up€his€misconduct.ðð).€ÏIn€sum,€the€harm€resulting€from€the€original€wrongdoing,€as€in€the€present€case,Ïmay€be€exacerbated€by€intentional,€fraudulent,€malicious,€or€reckless€efforts€thatÏprevent€the€plaintiff€from€taking€immediate€corrective€action.ÌÌà@ àò òòòCONCLUSIONó óóóÌà àWe€have€concluded€that€the€Court€of€Appeals€erred€in€reversing€the€juryððsÏverdict€awarding€punitive€damages.€€There€was€clear€and€convincing€evidence€ofÏintentional,€fraudulent,€malicious,€or€reckless€conduct€on€the€part€of€Waters,€andÏthere€is€no€requirement€that€attempts€to€conceal€be€contemporaneous€with€theÏoriginal€wrongdoing.€€The€judgment€of€the€Court€of€Appeals€is€therefore€reversedÏin€part€and€the€juryððs€verdict€as€to€punitive€damages€is€reinstated.€€The€case€isÏremanded€to€the€trial€court€for€a€new€trial€solely€on€the€issue€of€compensatoryÏdamages.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€defendant/appellee,€Larry€Waters,Ïfor€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÓ ` °‚XN p0*ŒX ÓÓÓÌà àà à_________________________________Ìà àà àRILEY€ANDERSON,€Chief€Justice̛̜œÌ›Ìò òConcur:ó óÌÌDrowota,€Birch,€and€Holder,€JJ.ÌReid,€Sp.J.Ì