Rubenfield v. Watson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that punitive damages need not be included in prayer for relief where complaint otherwise indicates presence of wantonness, malice, or reckless disregard
• finding the district court erred by not instructing the jury on punitive damages because while the complaint did not include a request for punitive damages, it alleged conduct which would support such damages
• taped deposition conducted two months before trial allowed movant sufficient time to investigate witness’ background, despite other impediments
• “Evidence that is contained in the public records at the time of trial cannot be considered newly discovered evidence.”
• “Evidence that is contained in the public records at the time of trial cannot be considered newly discovered evidence.”
• “If the complaint alleges conduct that would support a claim for punitive damages, and if evidence is presented creating a jury question on such relief, the judge commits reversible error in not instructing the jury on that issue.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).