Legal Opinion

Fleegel v. Estate of Boyles

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 2002No. S-9091, S-9441PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FABE, Chief Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

Monica Fleegel sought compensatory and punitive damages from a drunk driver, Michael Boyles,1 who injured her in a car accident. The jury awarded Fleegel compensatory damages, but although it found that punitive damages were warranted, it made no monetary award for punitive damages. On appeal Fleegel appeals a number of the trial court’s evidentiary rulings, and Boyles cross-appeals the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees to Fleegel. Because the trial court did .not abuse its discretion in its evi-dentiary rulings and because it appropriately…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Guin v. HaAlaska Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Malvo Ex Rel. Malvo v. J. C. Penney Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Sturm, Ruger & Co., Inc. v. DayAlaska Supreme Court · 1979
  4. Dura Corp. v. HarnedAlaska Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Dayton Haworth v. State of Nevada, Dayton Haworth v. State of NevadaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Crittell v. BingoAlaska Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Wallace v. PoulosDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2012
  3. Button v. Haines BoroughAlaska Supreme Court · 2009
  4. State, Department of Transportation & Public Facilities v. MillerAlaska Supreme Court · 2006
  5. Matanuska Electric Ass'n v. Municipality of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 2008

6 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