In re First Alliance Mortg. Co., 471 F.3d 977, 998 (9th Cir. 2006)
    “Under California law, punitive damages are appropriate where a plaintiff establishes by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is guilty of (1) fraud, (2) oppression or (3) malice. Cal.Civ.Code §3294(a).  According to the definitions provided in section 3294(c), a plaintiff may not recover punitive damages unless the defendant acted with intent or engaged in “despicable conduct”.”
In re Lundell, 236 B.R. 720 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1999)
    Damage to estate from debtor’s failure to deliver estate property to trustee not contingent on future determination of estate’s insolvency.

Robi v. Five Platters, Inc., 918 F.2d 1439 (9th Cir. 1990)
    Punitive damages - California law

In re Sansone, 99 B.R. 981, 989 (Bankr.C.D. Cal. 1989)
    Test for determining right to punitives - California law

Professional Seminar Consultants, Inc. v. Sino Am. Technology Exchange Council, Inc. 727 F.2d 1470, 1476 (9th Cir. 1984)
    Punitive damages
    factors: 1) nature of defendant’s acts, 2) amount of compensatory award, 3) defendant’s wealth

Adams v. Murakami, 54 Cal.3d 105, 109 (1991)
    Punitive damages

In re Wolverton Associates, 909 F.2d 1286 (9th Cir. 1990)
    Punitive damages

Neal v. Farmers Ins. Exchange, 21 Cal.3d 925 (1978)
    Punitive damages