英语论文网

留学生硕士论文 英国论文 日语论文 澳洲论文 Turnitin剽窃检测 英语论文发表 留学中国 欧美文学特区 论文寄售中心 论文翻译中心

Bussiness ManagementMBAstrategyHuman ResourceMarketingHospitalityE-commerceInternational Tradingproject managementmedia managementLogisticsFinanceAccountingadvertisingLawBusiness LawEducationEconomicsBusiness Reportbusiness planresearch proposal

英语论文题目英语教学英语论文商务英语英语论文格式商务英语翻译广告英语商务英语商务英语教学英语翻译论文英美文学英语语言学文化交流中西方文化差异英语论文范文英语论文开题报告初中英语教学英语论文文献综述英语论文参考文献

ResumeRecommendation LetterMotivation LetterPSapplication letterMBA essayBusiness Letteradmission letter Offer letter

澳大利亚论文英国论文加拿大论文芬兰论文瑞典论文澳洲论文新西兰论文法国论文香港论文挪威论文美国论文泰国论文马来西亚论文台湾论文新加坡论文荷兰论文南非论文西班牙论文爱尔兰论文

小学英语教学初中英语教学英语语法高中英语教学大学英语教学听力口语英语阅读英语词汇学英语素质教育英语教育毕业英语教学法

英语论文开题报告英语毕业论文写作指导英语论文写作笔记handbook英语论文提纲英语论文参考文献英语论文文献综述Research Proposal代写留学论文代写留学作业代写Essay论文英语摘要英语论文任务书英语论文格式专业名词turnitin抄袭检查

temcet听力雅思考试托福考试GMATGRE职称英语理工卫生职称英语综合职称英语职称英语

经贸英语论文题目旅游英语论文题目大学英语论文题目中学英语论文题目小学英语论文题目英语文学论文题目英语教学论文题目英语语言学论文题目委婉语论文题目商务英语论文题目最新英语论文题目英语翻译论文题目英语跨文化论文题目

日本文学日本语言学商务日语日本历史日本经济怎样写日语论文日语论文写作格式日语教学日本社会文化日语开题报告日语论文选题

职称英语理工完形填空历年试题模拟试题补全短文概括大意词汇指导阅读理解例题习题卫生职称英语词汇指导完形填空概括大意历年试题阅读理解补全短文模拟试题例题习题综合职称英语完形填空历年试题模拟试题例题习题词汇指导阅读理解补全短文概括大意

商务英语翻译论文广告英语商务英语商务英语教学

无忧论文网

联系方式

法律案例分析:以灰色诉福特汽车公司的判断是肯定的

论文作者:留学生论文论文属性:职称论文 Scholarship Papers登出时间:2010-12-03编辑:anterran点击率:21504

论文字数:4041论文编号:org201012031200481118语种:英语论文 English地区:美国价格:免费论文

附件:20101203120048725.rtf

关键词:FORD MOTORGrayCivil Procedure > Discovery > Disclosures > Mandatory Disclosures

RICHARD GRIMSHAW, a Minor, etc., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Defendant and Appellant.  CARMEN GRAY, a Minor, etc., et al.,

留学生作业代写http://www.51lunwen.org/StudentPapers.htmlPlaintiffs and Appellants, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Defendant and Appellant

Civ. No. 20095

Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two

119 Cal. App. 3d 757; 174 Cal. Rptr. 348; 1981 Cal. App. LEXIS 1859; CCH Prod. Liab. Rep. P8999

May 29, 1981

SUBSEQUENT HISTORY:  [***1]  A petition for a rehearing was denied June 18, 1981, and the petitions of appellant Ford Motor Company and appellants Gray et al. for a hearing by the Supreme Court were denied September 10, 1981. 

PRIOR HISTORY: Superior Court of Orange County, Nos. 197761, 199397, Leonard Goldstein, Judge. 


DISPOSITION: The judgment in Gray v. Ford Motor Co. is affirmed. 


CASE SUMMARY:


PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Appellant car manufacturer challenged an order of the Superior Court of Orange County (California), which denied its motion for a directed verdict as to punitive damages in an action for negligence and strict liability arising from an accident in which a car burst into flames. Appellee passenger cross-appealed a remittitur, while appellee estate of the deceased driver challenged denial of leave to amend its complaint to seek punitive damages.

OVERVIEW: Appellant car manufacturer challenged denial of its motion for a directed verdict and an amended trial court judgment. Appellees were the estate of the deceased driver of a Pinto car that burst into flames in an accident, and a 13-year-old passenger who was severely burned. Appellees had sued on theo-ries of negligence and strict liability, alleging that appellant knew from crash-test results about design defects in the Pinto's fuel system. Appellant assailed the judgment as a whole, assigning numerous errors and irregularities. Appellant primarily contended that the punitive damages award was statutorily unauthorized and constitutionally invalid. Appellee estate cross-appealed, claiming that the statutory bar against punitive damages in a wrongful death action was unconstitutional. The court affirmed the judgment because it was not a denial of equal protection to preclude punitive damages in a wrongful death action. Finding appellant's contentions either lacked merit or failed to demonstrate prejudice, the court held that the punitive damages award was reasonable and just, and declined to modify the judgment by reducing the amount of the remittitur.

OUTCOME: The judgment awarding punitive damages was affirmed as reduced because the reduced puni-tive damage award was reasonable and just, and was not excessive in light of its deterrent purpose, appel-lant's wealth, and the size of the compensatory awards. The court also held that a rational justification ex-isted for the legislative denial of the right to seek punitive damages for wrongful death actions.

CORE TERMS: punitive damages, malice, punitive, excessive, misconduct, tank, heir, manufacturer, fuel tank, rear, fuel, new trial, exemplary, decedent, crash, personal representative, discovery, expert witness, design defects, wrongful death statute, death actions, conscious disregard, recoverable, barrier, compensa-tory damages, admonition, mistrial, complain, survival, prejudicial

LexisNexis(R) Headnotes

Civil Procedure > Discovery > Disclos论文英语论文网提供整理,提供论文代写英语论文代写代写论文代写英语论文代写留学生论文代写英文论文留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。

共 1/74 页首页上一页1234567下一页尾页

相关文章

    英国英国 澳大利亚澳大利亚 美国美国 加拿大加拿大 新西兰新西兰 新加坡新加坡 香港香港 日本日本 韩国韩国 法国法国 德国德国 爱尔兰爱尔兰 瑞士瑞士 荷兰荷兰 俄罗斯俄罗斯 西班牙西班牙 马来西亚马来西亚 南非南非

       Europe (24-hours)
       EN:13917206902
       china (24-hours)
       CN:13917206902
    
    在线客服团队
        全天候24小时在线客服
          QQ:949925041 
      

    微信公众订阅号