 The defendant could use the facts of the Allied-Signal case, to suggest that the past slip-and-fall incidents in the store would not show that Martin had clear knowledge of the potential harmful consequences of the applesauce spill, considering that prior incidences involved different types of foods that caused the fall. However, this argument is likely to be unconvincing to a judge who would probably see this factual variation as immaterial.  
	Even if the plaintiff can prove that the defendant acted with conscious disregard an award for punitive damages cannot be given unless the plaintiff also shows that the conduct was “despicable.” Conduct is defined as despicable if it is so “vile,” “base,” or “wretched,” that it would be “despised by ordinary people.” Mock, 5 Cal. Rptr. 2d 594 at 609. The case, American Airlines, Inc. v. Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, 117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 685 (2002), is an example of a case where the plaintiff could prove that the defendant acted with conscious disregard but was not able to present evidence that the conduct met the despicable conduct standard. In this case, the airline had retained attorney Gregory Long and his law firm to represent the airline regarding the purchase of plane from the company “MDC”.  Id. at 688-689. When American Airlines experienced problems with the plane they again asked Long to represent them in suing MDC for breach of contract. Id. Three years later a different company (ADO) sued MDC in a matter unrelated to the American Airlines litigation, and ADO asked Long to be a federal rule 30(b)(6) witness for them in discovery. Long agreed to be this witness, despite American Airlines objections. Id. at 691-693.  In October 1996, American Airlines sued Long and the law firm for breach of fiduciary duty and professional negligence, and requested punitive relief. Id. at 694.  The court held that while Long’s conduct was “improper,” and “a violation of the State Bar Rules of Professional Conduct,” and could fairly be seen to have consciously disregarded the plaintiff’s rights, it did not meet the despicable conduct standard. Id. at 712. The Court reaches this conclusion based on the reasoning that Long refused to answer any questions regarding American Airlines during the deposition. The Court reasons that while Long’s agreement to be a witness was “self-serving” his refusal to compromise any confidential information of Americans showed that “he held American’s interests above those of ADO.” Id. at 710. Based on this reasoning the court upheld the trial court’s grant of summary adjudication of the punitive damage claim. Id. at 712. 
	Another example of a case where the plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant’s actions were despicable is, Lackner v. North, 37 Cal. Rptr. 3d 863 (2006). In this case, the plaintiff Teri Lackner was talking to her husband at the base of a ski run, in a deserted rest area, when high school ski-team member, Cassidy North collided into Lackner after racing down the run at full speed. 