Legal Opinion

Boyd v. Bevilacqua

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 16, 1966No. Civ. 22538PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, P. J.

Defendants 1 and cross-complainants 2 appeal from an adverse judgment awarding plaintiffs compensatory and punitive damages against defendants and denying cross-complainants the Bevilacquas all recovery on their cross-complaint. As to the complaint, the judgment was entered on a jury verdict awarding plaintiffs compensatory damages in the sum of $65,750 and punitive damages in the sum of $34,250, subsequently ordered reduced to $50,000 compensatory and $20,000 punitive damages, pursuant to a remission filed by plaintiffs as a condition for the denial of defendants’ motion for a new trial. 3…

2Cases cited61 opinions

  1. Universal Sales Corp. v. California Press Manufacturing Co.California Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Ward v. TaggartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Wise v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1963
  4. Nelson v. AbrahamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  5. Rodriguez v. BarnettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959

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

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. Shanghai Automation Instrument Co., Ltd. v. KueiDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2001
  2. April Enterprises, Inc. v. KTTVCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
  3. Diane MILLER and Pamela Lewis, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. FAIRCHILD INDUSTRIES, INC., a Maryland Corporation, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
  4. Bustamante v. Intuit, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2006
  5. Twomey v. Mitchum, Jones & Templeton, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1968

38 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