Stevens v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendant may inform the jury about other punitive damages awards for the same conduct, but the impact of those awards can only be measured if the awards have actually been paid
• holding that defendant may inform the jury about other punitive damages awards for the same conduct, but the impact of those awards can only be measured if the awards have actually been paid
• accepting comment e but holding that no evidence to support mitigation was offered
• accepting comment e but holding that no evidence to support mitigation was offered
• rejecting the company's strategy of withholding evidence on prior punitive damages in an attempt to later attack a punitive damages award
• “Without any showing of punitive damages actually assessed and paid [by OCF], the evidence fell far short of demonstrating ‘overkill.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).