Rifkind & Sterling, Inc. v. Rifkind
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
FUKUTO, J.
Concern about potential for arbitrariness in punitive damage awards by juries has recently led to recognition of certain constitutional, due process limitations on the imposition of such awards. In this case, the appellant contends that one of those limitations, the requirement of judicial review, must apply to a punitive damage award assessed not by a court or a jury, but by a private arbitrator, under a voluntary agreement to arbitrate. We disagree. We conclude that, just as the constitutional guarantees of due process do not control private arbitration proceedings,…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Pacific Mutual Life Insurance v. HaslipSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Thomas v. Union Carbide Agricultural Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- D. H. Overmyer Co., Inc. of Ohio v. Frick Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Moncharsh v. Heily & BlaseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Naoko Ohno v. Yuko YasumaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Lagatree v. Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps LLPCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Birmingham News Co. v. HornSupreme Court of Alabama · 2004
- Sarofim v. Trust Co. of the WestCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2006
- Ajida Technologies, Inc. v. Roos Instruments, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2001
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.