Pluid v. B.K.
Alaska Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
2Per curiam
I. INTRODUCTION
Frank Pluid was found hable, after a bench trial, for committing acts of sexual battery against B.K., the child of a woman with whom Pluid lived. The judge, sitting as the finder of fact, awarded both compensatory and punitive damages. Pluid appeals on the ground that B.K. failed to present sufficient evidence to justify the trial court’s award of damages for B.K.’s future medical expenses. He also argues that the award of punitive damages was excessive. B.K. cross-appeals the trial court’s refusal to award damages for her past medical expenses. For the reasons that…
3Cases cited14 opinions
- Rogers Ex Rel. Rogers v. Florence Printing Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1958
- Brooks v. BrooksAlaska Supreme Court · 1987
- Langdon v. ChampionAlaska Supreme Court · 1988
- Clary Insurance Agency v. DoyleAlaska Supreme Court · 1980
- Alaskan Village, Inc. v. Smalley Ex Rel. SmalleyAlaska Supreme Court · 1986
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by25 opinions
- Power Constructors, Inc. v. Taylor & HintzeAlaska Supreme Court · 1998
- 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1798, 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3432, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 2517, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 4738 Sherrie Ace, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Aetna Life Insurance Company, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Lynden Inc. v. WalkerAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
- Mapco Express, Inc. v. FaulkAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
- Central Bering Sea Fishermen's Ass'n v. AndersonAlaska Supreme Court · 2002
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.