Legal Opinion
United Technologies Corp. v. American Home Assur. Co.
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided June 5, 2000No. 2:92cv267 (JBA)PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S RENEWED AND SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES [DOC. #995]
ARTERTON, District Judge.
On May 13, 1998, the jury in Phase II of this trial found defendant American Home Assurance Company (“American Home”) liable for common law bad faith and for three violations of the Connecticut Unfair Insurances Practices Act (Conn. Gen.Stat. § 38a-816(6)). Because CUIPA violations can be the basis for violations under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, Mead v. Burns, 199 Conn. 651, 509 A.2d 11 (1986), punitive damages may be awarded (Conn.Gen.Stat. § 42-110g), and plaintiff…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- BMW of North America, Inc. v. GoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Pacific Mutual Life Insurance v. HaslipSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- United States v. BestfoodsSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Browning-Ferris Industries of Vermont, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- TXO Production Corp. v. Alliance Resources Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Sawtelle v. Waddell & Reed, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Evergreen West Business Center, LLC v. EmmertCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
- TVT Records v. Island Def Jam Music GroupDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2003
- Lithia Medford LM, Inc. v. YovanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012