In February, when the Supreme Court heard oral arguments over whether the $2.5 billion award of punitive damages to victims of the Exxon Valdez disaster was too high, we noted with some amusement that the attorney for ExxonMobil cited an 1818 case as precedent, saying ship owners could not be held liable for the actions of their ship captains.

Today, more than 19 years after the Valdez slammed into a reef in Alaska's Prince William Sound, spilling more than 11 million gallons of crude oil, the high court agreed with Exxon, ruling 5-3 that the punitive award cannot exceed the $507 million in compensatory damages that the company already has paid victims for their ecomonic losses. That means the 33,000 plaintiffs in the case will each receive about $15,000. They would have received about $75,000 each if the court had ruled in their favor.

"Our explanation of the constitutional upper limit confirms that the 1:1 ration is not too low," Justice David Souter wrote for the majority. Justice Samuel Alito recused himself from the case because he owns Exxon stock.

Granted, the company already has paid about $3.4 billion in fines, penalties, cleanup costs and other expenses resulting from the worst oil spill in U.S. history. Then again, they also hired a drinking alcoholic to take the helm of a supertanker.

Today's ruling ends an arduous legal battle for Alaskan residents and business owners affected by the spill. It was 1994 when an Anchorage jury first sided with the plaintiffs and awarded them $5 billion in punitive damages. In subsequent appeals over the last 14 years, that figure was cut to $4 billion, raised to $4.5 billion, lowered to $2.5 billion, and then lowered one final time today to $507 million.

When it asked the Supreme Court to take the case, ExxonMobil said the $3.4 billion it already had paid was "more than enough to deter and punish anyone for anything."