Legal Opinion

Andreason v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

Court of Appeals of Utah

Decided February 18, 1993No. 910615-CAPublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GREENWOOD, Judge:

Defendant Aetna Casualty & Surety Company appeals a jury verdict awarding plaintiffs, Dana and Derek Andreason, damages based upon a promissory estoppel theory. On appeal, defendant claims that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to either subject the jury award to remittitur or order a new trial. Plaintiffs cross-appeal, claiming that the trial court erred as a matter of law in refusing to grant them prejudgment interest on the jury award. We affirm the trial court’s decision upholding the jury award without prejudgment interest.

BACKGROUND

Because the parties…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Scharf v. BMG Corp.Utah Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Crookston v. Fire Insurance ExchangeUtah Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Atkin Wright & Miles v. Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1985
  4. State v. HowellUtah Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Fell v. Union Pac. Ry. Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1907

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

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. J. William OldenburgCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1994
  2. Encon Utah, LLC v. Fluor Ames Kraemer, LLCUtah Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Viernow v. Euripides Development Corp.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1998
  4. Nunley v. Westates Casing Services, Inc.Utah Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Cornia v. WilcoxUtah Supreme Court · 1995

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

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

Powered by the Exa API