Remove Punitive Damages Remove Statute Remove Tennessee
article thumbnail

Compensatory damages equal to amount plaintiff paid for home affirmed in fraud case.

Day on Torts

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. The jury also awarded plaintiff punitive damages in this case. internal citation omitted). Code Ann. § Code Ann. §

article thumbnail

Judgment for damages void where defendant was not served with amended omplaint.

Day on Torts

Plaintiff’s initial complaint was filed in May 2009 and sought $1 million in compensatory damages and $1 million in punitive damages. Defendant was never served with this amended complaint, but the trial court entered a final judgment awarding plaintiff $3 million in total damages in August 2017. In Turner v. Code Ann. §

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Chancery court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over defamation tort claims.

Day on Torts

Plaintiff’s complaint sought compensatory damages for defamation, false light invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. It also sought punitive damages, injunctive relief, and a declaratory judgment that defendants had violated certain statutes. internal citation omitted).

Tort 59
article thumbnail

Certifying Questions To State Supreme Courts – Lessons from Lindenberg

SquirePattonBoggs

2018), which held that Tennessee’s statutory cap on punitive damages violates the state constitution. The district court had actually granted certification on that question but the Tennessee Supreme Court (after a seven month delay) declined to take the issue because certain factual questions had not been resolved.

Court 45
article thumbnail

November 2020 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

The First Circuit—like the Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits in other climate change cases—concluded that the scope of its appellate review was limited to whether the defendants properly removed the case under the federal-officer removal statute. Tennessee Valley Authority , No. Center for Biological Diversity v. 3:18-cv-01446 (N.D.