Legal Opinion
Hamlin v. Hampton Lumber Mills, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided September 10, 2008No. 040302235; A130213PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, J.
Defendant appeals a judgment awarding plaintiff $175,000 in punitive damages for defendant’s failure to comply with ORS 659A.043(1) when it did not reinstate plaintiff as an employee after he had recovered from a work-related injury. Defendant makes two assignments of error: (1) the trial court erred in denying its motion for a directed verdict on plaintiffs claim for punitive damages, and (2) the court erred in refusing to reduce the punitive damage award as constitutionally excessive. As described below, we affirm with respect to defendant’s first assignment of error. However, we conclude…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- 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
- Philip Morris USA v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Woodbury v. CH2M Hill, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2003
- Vasquez-Lopez v. Beneficial Oregon, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Hamlin v. HAMPTON LUMBER MILLS, INC.Oregon Supreme Court · 2011
- Strawn v. Farmers InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
- Wieber v. Fedex Ground Package System, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
- English Ex Rel. Sellers v. Multnomah CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
- Hamlin v. Hampton Lumber Mills, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.