Possibly. In a case, I argued to the insurance adjuster (for Metlife) that if we filed a lawsuit, the judge may allow us to seek punitive damages because the defendant left the scene and did not give the police officers a chance to examine him and conduct sobriety tests. We argued that the at fault driver, Mr. Jones, was apprehended later and may have had the opportunity to change his clothes, shower, brush his teeth and otherwise take actions to conceal the possibility of alcohol consumption.
Because of the these facts, we may have been able to prove that he was guilty of spoliation (“destruction of evidence”) and he prevented our client, the Plaintiff and the investigating police department from establishing facts giving rise to intoxication as a contributing cause to this incident. Clearly, this would give rise to punitive damages; however, that evidence is no longer available due to his fleeing the scene. If I am successful in establishing this evidence, the burden of proof will shift to Mrs. Jones to disprove his conduct, under the spoliation inference and punitive damages will be determined by a jury, under that shifting burden.
Aggravating circumstances, such as the defendant leaving the scene of the accident, usually make the jury angry and increase the value of the bodily injury claim. On the verdict form, the jury is given a separate line to add any amount that they feel is appropriate for punitive damages. Although the jury is not supposed to let their feelings influence an award for pain and suffering, this may spill over and increase any award for non-economic compensatory damages (pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, metal anguish, etc.).