Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 36 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from May v. Chrysler Group, LLC.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | May v. Chrysler Group, LLC Anchor | green | “thus, like the district court, we decide whether the jury had 'a le gally sufficient evidentiary basis' for its verdict.” | 9 |
| 2 | Noemi Valdivia v. Township High School District | green | “we view the facts and evidence in the light most favorable to epic, as the litigant who pre vailed before the jury.” | 7 |
| 3 | Monette Saccameno v. U.S. Bank National Association | green | “the constitu tion is not the most relevant limit to a federal court when as sessing punitive damages, as it comes into play 'only after the assessment has been tested against statutory and common law principles.” | 7 |
| 4 | Lompe v. Sunridge Partners, LLC | green | “in many cases, com pensatory damages less than 1,000,000 have also been con sidered substantial.” | 7 |
| 5 | Monette Saccameno v. U.S. Bank National Association | green | “what counts as substantial depends on the facts of the case, and an award of this size (or larger) might not mandate a 1:1 ratio on another set of facts.” | 6 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.