Patrick Blanks v. Fluor Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “two separate corporations are regarded as wholly distinct legal entities, even if one partly or wholly owns the other”
• holding plaintiffs made a submissible case for punitive damages in a mass tort case where plaintiffs adduced evidence “the defendants hid information from regulators[ and] resisted regulatory changes
• explaining parent/subsidiaries are “regarded as wholly distinct legal entities, even if one partly or wholly owns the other”
• reversing punitive damage award against one defendant as jury instructions required jury to consider undifferentiated conduct
• requiring “complete domination . . . so that corporate entity . . . had . . . no separate mind, will or existence of its own”
• observing, in affirming a judgment in favor of injured children and against the owner of a lead smelter, that “the most crucial and rapid time for brain growth and development is during the last trimester of pregnancy and the first five to seven years after birth”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).