What is the test for punitive damages?

At pages 25-256 and 25-257, the author describes punitive damages as a “hybrid between a display of ethical indignation and the imposition of a criminal fine” [Per Garrison J. in Haines v. Schultz, 50 N.J. L. 481]. The author goes on to state that punitive damages have been characterized as “fictional” or “judicial” damages reflecting the displeasure of the court. The purpose of a punitive award is to permit the court to express its outrage or indignation at, or disapproval of, the conduct of the defendant, to make him an example, punish him for it, and serve to deter the defendant and others from repeating the same or similar conduct. Punitive damages “are designed to express the repugnance of the public … towards the outrageous and heinous conduct of the defendant.” They take into consideration both the interests of the plaintiff and the interests of society. Their “object … is to make the example as well as the punishment fit the offense”. The award is a recognition that “some wrongs are more blameworthy than others.” They serve the important legal objectives of “retribution, deterrence and denunciation.” Unlike compensatory damages, they are not awarded at large.