court’s denial of UPS’s motion for judgment as a matter of law on Jones’s request for punitive damages. Jury to Determine Amount of Punitive Damages UPS argues the district court erred in permitting the jury to determine the appropriate amount of punitive damages because Kansas law requires the court to make this determination. Under Kan. Stat. Ann. § 60-3702(a), if a civil jury determines that punitive damages “shall be allowed,” the state court must conduct a “separate proceeding ... to determine the amount of ... damages to be awarded.” The district court held that § 60~3702(a) was procedural in nature, applied federal law regarding punitive damages, and submitted this issue to the jury. See Pac. Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Haslip, 499 U.S. 1, 16, 111 S.Ct. 1032, 113 L.Ed.2d 1 (1991) (<HOLDING>). Because this issue involves only questions of
holding a court may not award punitive damages holding that tort law and the law of punitive damages are not controlled by the contract choice of law provision holding that punitive damages are not allowed under the flsa holding that under federal common law juries determined issues relating to punitive damages holding that punitive damages could not be granted because punitive damages are a matter of substantive law and substantive state law  must yield to federal limitations