Quedding v. Arisumi Bros., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the amount of a damages award is a matter exclusively within the province of the trier of fact
• “[I]f the evidence presented at trial is insufficient to support a finding that the ‘wrongdoer’ acted wantonly, oppressively, or maliciously, the issue of punitive damages may not be presented to the jury.”
• punitive damages appropriate in breach of contract action where defendant has acted wantonly or oppressively or has engaged in some willful misconduct raising a presumption of conscious indifference to consequences
• “conduct amounting to wanton, oppressive, malicious, or reckless behavior”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).