Legal Opinion

Jackson v. Potter

District Court, D. Colorado

Decided November 21, 2008No. Civil Action 06-cv-01881-REB-CBSPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR REMITTITUR

BLACKBURN, District Judge.

The matter before me is Defendant’s Motion for Remittitur [# 96], filed July 10, 2008. I deny the motion.

I.JURISDICTION

I have subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question).

II.STANDARD OF REVIEW

“It is a fundamental legal principle that the determination of the quantum of damages in civil cases is a fact-finder’s function. The trier of the facts, who has the first-handed opportunity to hear the testimony and to observe the demeanor of the witnesses, is clothed with a wide latitude and…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Blanke v. AlexanderCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1998
  2. Smith v. Northwest Financial Acceptance, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1997
  3. Hugh L. Bennett v. Bobby Joe LongacreCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1985
  4. Sheets v. Salt Lake CountyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1995
  5. Murphy Oil USA Inc v. Trivental IncCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2006

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Blangsted v. Snowmass-Wildcat Fire Protection DistrictDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 2009
  2. CMI Roadbuilding Inc v. Specsys IncDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 2024
  3. Harp v. BarrDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API