Victor Taylor v. Thomas Simpson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a 1:1 ratio resulting in a $140 million punitive damages award comported with due process
• upholding the jury’s unjust-enrichment award, which was calculated as defendant’s “avoided research and development costs,” even though the district court entered an injunction prohibiting the future use, possession, and retention of plaintiff’s trade secrets
• “In sum, con- sidering the factors together, we conclude that the maximum per- missible award of punitive damages in this case is $140 million—a 1:1 ratio relative to the compensatory award.”
• “We have noted at least one way a plaintiff may prove the amount of benefit conferred on the defendant when the case involved misappropriation of trade secrets,” which is to show the defendant “gain[ed] ‘a significant head start in [its] operation.’” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius, Ltd. v. the TriZetto Grp.
  Second Circuit· 2023-05-25· cited 34×
• PPG Industries Inc v. Jiangsu Tie Mao Glass Co Ltd
  Third Circuit· 2022-08-30· cited 32×
• Motorola Solutions, Inc. v. Hytera Communications Corporation Ltd.
  Seventh Circuit· 2024-07-02· cited 16×
• BioPoint, Inc. v. Dickhaut
  First Circuit· 2024-07-30· cited 4×
• EEOC v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
  Seventh Circuit· 2022-06-30
• Epic Systems Corporation v. Tata Consultancy Services Limited
  Seventh Circuit· 2025-06-04
• Keith Edwards v. Officer J. Grubbs
  Eleventh Circuit· 2026-03-13

Other cases named Victor Taylor v. Thomas Simpson

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• Victor Taylor v. Thomas Simpson
  Sixth Circuit· 2020-08-25· cited 2×