Search for: "Philip Bullock"
Results 41 - 55
of 55
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Dec 2008, 3:38 am
Philip Morris), and if so, whether those awards will survive appellate review under the Supreme Court's recent series of punitive damages decisions (unlike the award in Bullock, which was remanded for a new trial in light of Williams II). [read post]
30 Jul 2008, 11:11 pm
The committee proposes: (1) adding a quote from footnote 21 in Bullock v. [read post]
4 Jul 2008, 2:10 pm
Philip Morris.) [read post]
18 Jun 2008, 9:25 pm
Supreme Court's 2007 opinion in Philip Morris v. [read post]
30 Apr 2008, 2:18 pm
Philip Morris. [read post]
14 Apr 2008, 3:17 pm
For those of you following the ongoing saga of the $28 billion punitive damages award in Bullock v. [read post]
3 Apr 2008, 2:14 pm
We've been tracking the developments in Bullock v. [read post]
14 Mar 2008, 10:10 am
The plaintiff in Bullock v. [read post]
13 Mar 2008, 12:05 am
For further posts on this case, see our original post about the Bullock opinion, our follow-up post about the impact of Bullock on the CACI punitive damages instructions, and our follow-up post about the use of remittitur to cure legal error. [read post]
10 Mar 2008, 1:45 pm
Williams (2007) 166 L.Ed.2d 940, 127 S.Ct. 1057 (see our earlier post on Bullock v. [read post]
12 Feb 2008, 6:27 am
The California Court of Appeals recently issued its decision in Bullock v. [read post]
31 Jan 2008, 10:28 am
The Bullock court outlines the usual use of a remittitur to cure an award that is flawed simply because it is just too high in light of the evidence. [read post]
30 Jan 2008, 4:52 pm
Contrary to the arguments of Bullock and her amici, Philip Morris was not required to include in its instruction a statement that the jury could consider harm to others in evaluating the reprehensibility of the conduct that harmed Bullock. [read post]
30 Jan 2008, 1:22 pm
"Click here for a page linking to all the briefing in Bullock. [read post]
15 Jan 2008, 10:15 am
Bullock v. [read post]
