Court Rules Legal Punitive Damages 
JURIST
JANUARY 1, 2021
The Iowa Supreme Court ruled Thursday that plaintiffs cannot recover punitive damages from the state when a law enforcement officer uses excessive force. Punitive damages are awarded as a way to punish the defendant and to deter that same conduct in the future.
JURIST
MAY 17, 2021
The jury awarded Hardeman $75 million in punitive damages, but the federal judge overseeing the trial reduced the punitive damages to $20 million. The jury also awarded Hardeman $5 million in compensatory damages for past and future pain and suffering.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Day on Torts
DECEMBER 5, 2022
The jury found defendant liable for intentional misrepresentation and awarded plaintiff $243,000 in compensatory damages, which was the purchase price of the home, and $250,000 in punitive damages. First, the Court of Appeals found that defendant waived his argument that the evidence supporting fraud was not legally sufficient.
SCOTUSBlog
NOVEMBER 1, 2021
Wilson asked the court to block the college and the trustees from enforcing the censure (which would include additional penalties such as barring him from running for officer positions on the board the following year) and $20,000 in damages and punitive damages. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit reversed.
Constitutional Law Reporter
SEPTEMBER 15, 2021
The District Court ruled that all class members had Article III standing on each of the three statutory claims. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiffs and awarded each class member statutory damages and punitive damages. Supreme Court’s Decision. Congress may enact legal prohibitions and obligations.
Conflict of Laws
JUNE 30, 2022
Key takeaways: Despite the fact that the elaboration of a judicial interpretation appears to have been put on hold, China’s Supreme People’s Court has now resorted to conference summaries, which are not legally binding but have a practical impact, to express its views in recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments.
FDA Law Blog
APRIL 23, 2021
The Court pointed out that its task was not to determine whether the ability of the FTC to substitute §13(b) for the administrative procedure in §5 and consumer redress under §19 was desirable, but rather to answer a “more purely legal question,” Slip Op. It did that by focusing on the text of the statute.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
197 
Let's personalize your content