In Jurinko v. Medical Protective Company, the 3rd Circuit trimmed an award of punitive damages and imposed a 1:1 compensatory:punitive ratio. This is the latest in a trend of cases following the U.S. Supreme Court`s 2008 decision in Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker, which affirmed the 9th Circuit`s reduction of punitive damages arising from the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill by half and imposed a 1:1 ratio in federal maritime cases. In Jurinko, the court addressed punitive damages awarded against an insurer in a bad faith claim under Pennsylvania law. The insurer`s failure to settle a claim against its insured led to a verdict that exceeded the policy limits. The court set the insured`s compensatory damages as the gap between the insurance limits and the underlying verdict amount. Noting that the compensatory damages were substantial ($1.6 million compensatory damages and $338,000 attorney fees and costs) and were only economic in nature, the court reduced the punitive damages from $6.2 million to $1.9 million (a 1:1 ratio). Cases like Jurinko may signal a trend of reducing excessive punitive damages that could well apply in environmental cases, even beyond insurance coverage disputes.