How do courts handle requests for punitive damages in cases with joined parties?

The reasoning behind the selection of the option that indicates courts evaluate requests for punitive damages based on common claims or separate handling is rooted in the complexity of cases involving joined parties. When multiple parties are involved, the court must consider the specific circumstances of each party's conduct and claims against them.

In cases with joined parties, the court will assess whether the claims arise from a common core of facts or if they are distinctively separate. If the claims share a factual basis, the court may decide to handle the punitive damages as part of the overall proceedings. Conversely, if the claims are distinct, the punitive damages may be evaluated separately, leading to different outcomes based on the actions of each individual party.

This approach allows for a more tailored justice system where the punitive damages are appropriately aligned with the specific misconduct of each party involved, ensuring that the punishment fits the individual circumstances rather than applying a blanket rule to all joined parties. Thus, the consideration of whether claims are common or separate is pivotal in determining how punitive damages are handled in such complex cases.