Legal Opinion

Halliburton Co. v. Claypoole

Wyoming Supreme Court

Decided February 3, 1994No. 93-17, 93-18PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McEWAN, District Judge (Retired).

The Halliburton Company appeals from a judgment entered upon a jury’s verdict. It contends the district court erred in denying its post-trial motions and that, in essence, the judgment is not supported by sufficient evidence, particularly with regard to the jury’s finding that Halliburton defrauded Patti Claypoole. In her cross-appeal, Claypoole asserts the jury’s verdict was sound in all respects and that the district court erred in reducing the jury’s general damage award, as well as the punitive damage award.

We affirm in part, but reverse the district court…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Caterpillar Tractor Co. v. DonahueWyoming Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Duffy v. BrownWyoming Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Peters Grazing Association v. LegerskiWyoming Supreme Court · 1975
  4. Goggins v. HarwoodWyoming Supreme Court · 1985
  5. DeWitty v. DeckerWyoming Supreme Court · 1963

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Feltner v. Casey Family ProgramWyoming Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Pokorny v. SalasWyoming Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Thunder Hawk Ex Rel. Jensen v. Union Pacific RailroadWyoming Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Little v. Kobos by and Through KobosWyoming Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Ravenswood Investment Co. v. Bishop Capital Corp.District Court, D. Wyoming · 2005

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API