Exxon Corp. v. Alvey

How courts have described this case

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

• determining that the amount of remittitur should be the maximum the jury could have awarded which would not be excessive
• stating that “[i]n our view the ‘maximum possible recovery’ approach is more appropriate in a remittitur context, because it comes closer to approximating the decision made by the jury”
• plaintiff suffered substantial paralysis of legs and other injuries when he fell in hole at drilling site
• plaintiff suffered substantial paralysis of legs and other injuries when he fell in hole at drilling site
• “Maximum possible recovery approach is more appropriate in a remittitur context, because it comes closer to approximating the decision made by the jury.”
• “Under the Alaska Workers’ Compensation Act, when an employee recovers damages from a third party, the employer is entitled to be reimbursed for workers’ compensation payments paid by the employer.” (citing AS 23.30.015(g)). 80 AS 23.30.045(a

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).