Legal Opinion
Pacific Mutual Life Insurance v. Haslip
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided March 4, 1991No. 89-1279PublishedCited by 1,330 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Blackmun
This case is yet another that presents a challenge to a punitive damages award.
I
In 1981, Lemmie L. Ruffin, Jr., was an Alabama-licensed agent for petitioner Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company. He also was a licensed agent for Union Fidelity Life Insurance Company. Pacific Mutual and Union are distinct and nonaffiliated entities. Union wrote group health insurance for municipalities. Pacific Mutual did not.
Respondents Cleopatra Haslip, Cynthia Craig, Alma M. Calhoun, and Eddie Hargrove were employees of Roosevelt City, an Alabama municipality. Ruffin, presenting himself as an agent of…
2Cases cited49 opinions
- Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Greenholtz v. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal & Correctional ComplexSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Snyder v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Smith v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- City of Newport v. Fact Concerts, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1,330 opinions
- Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
- BMW of North America, Inc. v. GoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. CampbellSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Mertens v. Hewitt AssociatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Exxon Shipping Co. v. BakerSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
1,325 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.