Skip to main content

DeMendoza v. Huffman

Citations

  • 51 P.3d 1232
  • 334 Or. 425
  • 2002 Ore. LEXIS 522

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that “plaintiffs do not have a vested prejudgment property right in punitive damages”
  • requiring payment of the state’s portion di rectly to the state and explicitly giving the state judgment creditor status
  • noting Lakin’s statement that the noneconomic damages cap in that case interfered with the plaintiffs’ right to receive the full amount of compensatory damages awarded
  • explaining legislature's authority to act in a way that does not unduly burden or substantially interfere with judicial function
  • upholding Oregon law requiring that 60% of any punitive award go to state-administered fund
  • examining legal works that were “pervasive in American courts in 1850s”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Balmer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

36 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

48 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named DeMendoza v. Huffman

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.