Citation network
Bfi, Inc. Vs. Kelco Disposal, Inc.
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 26, 1989
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
BFI, Inc. v. KelcoSearch
-
Disposal, Inc. - 492 U.S. 257 (1989) U.S. Supreme Court BFI, Inc. v. KelcoSearch
-
Disposal, Inc., 492 U.S. 257 (1989) Browning-Ferris Industries of Vermont, Inc. v. KelcoSearch
-
Fong Yue Ting v. UnitedSearch
-
A The Eighth Amendment received little debate in the First Congress, see Weems v. UnitedSearch
-
Weems v. UnitedSearch
-
the English Bill of Rights, which stressed the difference between civil damages and criminal fines. See Lord Townsend v. HughesSearch
-
Solem v. HelmSearch
-
receives exemplary damages from another party, and the government has no share in the recovery. Cf. United States v. HalperSearch
-
amercements clauses to be relevant to private damages of any kind, either then or at any later time. See Lord Townsend v. HughesSearch
-
based on reasoning that the jury's award was so excessive that it must have been based on bias or prejudice, see Wood v. GunstonSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Leith v. PopeSearch
-
Bl.W. 1327, 96 Eng.Rep. 777 (C.P.1780), or that the jury must have misconstrued the evidence, see Ash v. AshSearch
-
on the size of a civil damages award made pursuant to a statutory scheme, see, e.g., St. Louis, I. M. & S. R. Co. v. WilliamsSearch
-
discretion to award punitive damages in the absence of any express statutory limit. See Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. CrenshawSearch
-
issues involving the proper review of the jury award by a federal district court and court of appeals. See Donovan v. PennSearch
-
not made any argument specifically based on the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause. There is language in Carlson v. LandonSearch
-
its approach has not relied on history to the same extent when considering the scope of the Amendment. See Trop v. DullesSearch
-
to include money, recovered in a civil suit, which was paid to government. See Hanscomb v. RussellSearch
-
Gosselink v. CampbellSearch
-
or common law placed any restrictions on the award of exemplary damages other than those discussed above. Rookes v. BarnardSearch
-
and continue to allow punitive or exemplary damages to be awarded without substantial interference. See, e.g., Uren v. JohnSearch
-
Bahner v. MarwestSearch
-
Fogg v. McKnightSearch
-
Among the first cases to make explicit reference to exemplary damages was Huckle v. MoneySearch
-
Wilkes v. WoodSearch
-
Lofft. 1, 18-19, 98 Eng.Rep. 489, 498-499 (K.B.). Other English cases followed a similar approach. See, e.g., Roe v. HawkesSearch
-
Grey v. GrantSearch
-
Benson v. FrederickSearch
-
In United States v. HalperSearch
-
as well. Although in particular cases we have applied the doctrine petitioners advance, see Braniff Airways, Inc. v. NebraskaSearch
-
S. 598 -599 (1954), this is not a case where a respondent is making arguments in support of a judgment. See Revere v. MassachusettsSearch
-
Nye v. MerriamSearch
-
only if the evidence supports a finding that the defendant acted with malice, see, e.g., Appropriate Technology Corp. v. PalmaSearch
-
Rogers v. BigelowSearch
-
A. 417, 420 (1916). Punitive damages awards may be set aside if grossly and manifestly excessive. See Glidden v. SkinnerSearch
-
Supreme Court has declined to adopt a rule of proportionality between compensatory and punitive damages, Pezzano v. BonneauSearch
-
but does not allow punitive damages to stand when an award of compensatory damages has been vacated, Allard v. FordSearch
-
Lent v. HuntoonSearch
-
Vt. 539, 550, 470 A.2d 1162, 1170 (1983), quoting Kidder v. BaconSearch
-
there have been other substantial jury awards, however, in the State. See, e.g., Coty v. RamseySearch
-
the issue, in both instances we found it unnecessary to reach the question when we decided the case. See Neese v. SouthernSearch
-
Grunenthal v. LongSearch
-
Waters-Pierce Oil Co. v. PageSearch
-
St. Louis, I. M. & S. R. Co. v. WilliamsSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court BFI, Inc. v. KelcoSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial