Digital & Analog Design Corp. v. North Supply Co.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.
The thrust of appellant’s propositions of law seeks review of the damages awarded, both compensatory and punitive. In analyzing such claimed errors, we must proceed being cognizant that the damage awards were made by this jury which had expressed its findings by way of its affirmative answers to the aforestated interrogatories.
I
In its first proposition of law, regarding compensatory damages, NSC asserts that DAD’s business finance expert witness, Dr. James E. Zinser, did not base his testimony regarding lost profits upon an analysis of lost net profits, and failed to make any deduction for…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Preston v. MurtyOhio Supreme Court · 1987
- Glazer v. ChandlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
- Saberton v. GreenwaldOhio Supreme Court · 1946
- Kvenild v. TaylorWyoming Supreme Court · 1979
- City of Gahanna v. Eastgate Properties, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by65 opinions
- Lucarell v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2018
- State v. DurrOhio Supreme Court · 1991
- Ronald Borden v. The Paul Revere Life Insurance Company, Ronald Borden v. The Paul Revere Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1991
- Cantrell v. GAF Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1993
- Akron-Canton Waste Oil, Inc. v. Safety-Kleen Oil Services, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1992
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.