Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
MGW, INCORPORATED, Appellant, v. FREDRICKS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, et al., Appellants.
Petition for review GRANTED.
Pursuant to rule 29.2(a) of the California Rules of Court, review is limited to the issues of: (1) whether the punitive damages awards are consistent with federal constitutional due process as set forth in Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Haslip (1991) 499 U.S. 1 [111 S.Ct. 1032, 113 L.Ed.2d 1]; and (2) whether the amounts of the punitive damages awards are excessive under California law.
The court denies review of issues two and three enumerated in the petition for review (page 2) of Pacific Lighting Corporation. The court denies review of issues one and two enumerated in the petition for review (page 1) of Fredricks Development Corporation and Dunn Corporation.
LUCAS, C.J., and PANELLI, ARABIAN, BAXTER and GEORGE, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: S015966.
Decided: July 09, 1992
Court: Supreme Court of California,In Bank.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)