Statistics from the U.S. Justice Department study also show that punitive damages are awarded in only a small percentage of cases in state court.

If nothing else, plaintiffs’ lawyers said, the draft of the study made public last week just confirms that "horror stories" told by corporations about tort cases being out of control are overstatements.

"This study just gives plaintiffs’ lawyers another tool in their arsenal to combat tort reform rhetoric," said Chicago lawyer Robert A. Clifford, vice chairman of the American Bar Association’s Litigation Section.

Victor E. Schwartz, general counsel of The American Tort Reform Association in Washington, D.C., said that those in favor of tort reform do not contend that large punitive awards are "given out every day." Rather, he said, their concerns is the "random unpredictability" with which they occur, noting that large verdicts have been awarded in cases in which a corporation was found not liable under similar circumstances in other cases.

"It’s an absolutely ‘Russian roulette’ system," Mr. Schwartz asserted. "We say when they do occur...the awards can be very high." Such a system factors very heavily in settlement because it is "completely unpredictable," he said.

Mr. Schwartz added that he’s not surprised judges dole out more punitive awards than juries.

"They see themselves as sentencers," he said. "Judges are more in the role of making public policy."

The study, using 1996 data, was conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics in conjunction with the National Center for State Courts and will be released on July 2, said a Justice Department spokesman.

Cornell Law School professor Theodore Eisenberg, who helped analyze the data for the study, said what is most important about the results is that for the first time, "there is a basis for comparing a judge versus a jury’s behavior."

He said that may influence whether lawyers choose a bench trial over a jury trial.

A plaintiffs’ lawyer for more than 25 years, Mr. Clifford said that he favors a jury trial over a bench trial any day.

"On balance, I’ve found a jury of 12 people from the community is far more empathetic to the needs of my clients," said Mr. Clifford, noting that at least in Chicago, a bench trial in injury litigation is not the norm.

Montgomery, Ala., plaintiffs’ attorney Jere L. Beasley agreed, noting that he would still prefer to let a jury decide what his client deserves.

"I think 12 people collectively come to a better decision about what’s best for my client," said Mr. Beasley.

But West Palm Beach, Fla., civil litigator Robert Montgomery said that in his experience, judges are more likely than juries to grant punitive damages.

In Florida, punitive damages are limited to three times the compensatory damages. "But judges have the authority to override that limit and have done so in very egregious cases," said Mr. Montgomery, who was also not surprised that the study showed only a small percentage of cases resulted in any punitive award.

The study may have less impact in states such as Massachusetts, which does not authorize punitive damages in civil cases. The state does authorize the courts to award multiples of compensatory damages in certain types of cases, including those involving theft or trade secrets, discrimination and pollution.

In these instances, such awards are seen as comparable to punitive damages, said Gary R. Greenberg, a civil litigator in the Boston office of Miami’s Greenberg Traurig P.A. They have the same impact in terms of punishment and acting as a deterrent, he said.

In Massachusetts, it is up to a judge to determine double or treble damages, although he or she could ask a jury for guidance on an advisory basis, Mr. Greenberg said.

According to the Justice Department statistics reported last week in The Wall Street Journal, the majority of all punitive damages awards were for less than $40,000, whether decided by a judge or jury.

Data for the survey were collected from 75 of the country’s largest counties and from 10,278 state court tort or injury trials. Of the 4,879 trials won by plaintiff’s punitive damages were awarded in 162 cases (3.3%).

Judges found for plaintiffs 57% of the time. Juries, on the other hand, sided with defendants 52% of the time. In statistics on behavior of judges vs. juries, bench trials resulted in punitive damages 7.9% of the time, while juries awarded punitives 2.5% of the time.