What is the state law standard for reviewing an award of punitive damages?

The state law standard for reviewing an award of punitive damages is different than the constitutional due process standard. "Because the quintessence of punitive damages is to deter future misconduct by the defendant, the key question before the reviewing court is whether the amount of damages 'exceeds the level necessary to properly punish and deter.' [Citations.]" (Adams v. Murakami (1991) 54 Cal.3d 105, 110 (Adams).) "The question cannot be answered in the abstract. The reviewing court must consider the amount of the award in the light of the relevant facts." (Ibid.) Further, "[a] reviewing court cannot make a fully informed determination of whether an award of punitive damages is excessive unless the record contains evidence of the defendant's financial condition." (Ibid.)