Legal Opinion
Hiller v. Manufacturers Product Research Group of North America, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided August 4, 1995No. 93-08421PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judge:
Federal Signal Corporation (“Federal”) appeals from a judgment entered against it after trial before a jury. After finding Federal hable for fraud and violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act (“DTPA”), Tex.Bus. & Com.Code Ann. §§ 17.41-17.63 (Vernon 1987), the jury awarded Duravision, Inc. (“Duravision”) and Manufacturers Product Research Group of North America, Inc. (“MPR”), compensatory damages for lost profits, and punitive damages. Federal appeals this damage award, and we vacate and remand.1
I
In 1987 Marc Johnson was…
2Cases cited58 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Salve Regina College v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Holt Atherton Industries, Inc. v. HeineTexas Supreme Court · 1992
- Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. DeLanneyTexas Supreme Court · 1991
- Trenholm v. RatcliffTexas Supreme Court · 1983
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. Tires ProductsDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · 2001
- D.A.R.E. America v. Rolling Stone MagazineDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2000
- Sam B. Hiller, Federal Signal Corp. v. Manufacturers Product Research Group of North America, Inc., Intervenor-Plaintiff-Appellee v. Duravision, Inc., Duravision, Inc., Duravision, Inc., Duravision, Inc. v. Federal Signal Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1995