skip navigation
search

Search the opinions of the US Supreme Court

Search for:
All decisions
Only decisions since 1991
Only summaries of decisions
Only historic decisions
use and, or, not -- and is default
* acts as wildcard, phrases in "double quotes"

Did you mean damages and punitive or compensatory?

Your query damages and (punitive or compensatory) returned 59 results.

1000 EXXON SHIPPING CO. V. BAKER
[Syllabus]
978 STATE FARM MUT. AUTOMOBILE INS. CO.V. CAMPBELL
[Syllabus]
Whether the Utah Supreme Court, in direct contravention of this Court's decision in BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, 517 U.S.559 (1996), and fundamental principles of due process, committed constitutional error by reinstating a $145 million punitive damage award that punishes out-of-state conduct, is 145 time greater than the compensatory damages in the case, and is based upon the defendant's alleged business practices nationwide over a twenty year period, which were unrelated and dissimilar to the conduct by the defendant that gave rise to the plaintiff's claims?
715 KOLSTAD V. AMERICAN DENTAL ASSN.
[Syllabus]
710
[Syllabus]
704 O'GILVIE MINORS V. UNITED STATES, 519 U.S. 79 (1996)
[Syllabus]
683 BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, INC. V. GORE, 517 U.S. 559 (1996).
[Syllabus]
678 PHILIP MORRIS USA V. WILLIAMS
[Syllabus]
650
[Syllabus]
644 ATLANTIC SOUNDING CO. V. TOWNSEND
[Syllabus]
627 COOPER INDUSTRIES, INC. V. LEATHERMANTOOL GROUP, INC.
[Syllabus]
Courts of Appeals should apply a de novo, not an abuse-of-discretion, standard when reviewing district court determinations of the constitutionality of punitive damages awards.
608 COOK COUNTY V. UNITED STATES EX REL.CHANDLER
[Syllabus]
Local governments are "persons" amenable to qui tam actions under the federal False Claims Act.
552
[Syllabus]
539 WEST V. GIBSON
[Syllabus]
526 BARNES V. GORMAN
[Syllabus]
Punitive damages may not be awarded in private suits brought under §202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and §504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
511
[Syllabus]
468 MASTROBUONO V. SHEARSON LEHMAN HUTTON, INC., 514 U.S. 52 (1995).
[Syllabus]
451 POLLARD V. E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS & CO.
[Syllabus]
Front pay is not an element of compensatory damages under 42 U. S. C. §1981a and thus is not subject to the damages cap imposed by §1981a(b)(3).
443 JEFFERSON V. CITY OF TARRANT, ALA., 522 U.S. 75 (1997)
[Syllabus]
428 PACIFICARE HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC. V. BOOK
[Syllabus]
Whether a district court must compel arbitration of a plaintiff's RICO claims under a valid arbitration agreement even if that agreement does not allow an arbitrator to award punitive damages, leaving to the arbitrator in the first instance the decision of what remedies are available to the RICO plaintiff in arbitration.
423 EEOC V. WAFFLE HOUSE, INC.
[Syllabus]
An agreement between an employer and an employee to arbitrate employment-related disputes does not bar the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from pursuing victim-specific judicial relief, such as backpay, reinstatement, and damages, in an action to enforce Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
411
[Syllabus]
398 HUMANA INC. V. FORSYTH
[Syllabus]
381
[Syllabus]
381
[Syllabus]
361
[Syllabus]
323 LANE V. PENA, SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION, ET AL., 518 U.S. 187 (1996).
[Syllabus]
319 EDWARDS V. BALISOK, 520 U.S. 641 (1997).
[Syllabus]
319 SOSSAMON V. TEXAS
[Syllabus]
319
[Syllabus]
319 SAFECO INS. CO. OF AMERICA V. BURR
[Syllabus]
319
[Syllabus]
306 BURLINGTON N. & S. F.R.CO. V. WHITE
[Syllabus]
306 SNYDER V. PHELPS
[Syllabus]
295 ZICHERMAN V. KOREAN AIRLINES CO. LTD., 516 U.S. 217 (1996)
[Syllabus]
295 HAYWOOD V. DROWN
[Syllabus]
286 AMERICAN TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH CO. V. CENTRAL OFFICE TELEPHONE, INC., 524 U.S. 214 (1998)
[Syllabus]
280 EL AL ISRAEL AIRLINES, LTD. V. TSUI YUAN TSENG
[Syllabus]
280 CAMRETA V. GREENE
[Syllabus]
263
[Syllabus]
263 DESERT PALACE, INC. V. COSTA
[Syllabus]
1. Did the Ninth Circuit err in holding that direct evidence is not required in Title VII cases to trigger the application of the mixed-motive analysis set out in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins? 2. What are the appropriate standards for lower courts to follow in making a direct evidence determination in mixed-motive cases under Title VII?
244 KLEHR ET UX. V. A. O. SMITH CORP., 117 S.CT. 1984, 138 L.ED.2D 373 (1997).
[Syllabus]
244 MONTANA V. CROW TRIBE OF INDIANS, 523 U.S. 696 (1998)
[Syllabus]
233
[Syllabus]
220
[Syllabus]
220 GRATZ V. BOLLINGER
[Syllabus]
1. Does the University of Michigan's use of racial preferences in undergraduate admissions violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C.2000d), or 42 U.S.C. 1981?
220 GONZAGA UNIV. V. DOE
[Syllabus]
Respondent's action is foreclosed because the relevant provisions of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 create no personal rights to enforce under 42 U. S. C. §1983.
220 RANCHO PALOS VERDES V. ABRAMS
[Syllabus]
220 DEPARTMENT OF ARMY V. BLUE FOX, INC.
[Syllabus]
190 CAPERTON V. A.T. MASSEY COAL CO.
[Syllabus]
147 BOROUGH OF DURYEA V. GUARNIERI
[Syllabus]
147 MARTIN V. FRANKLIN CAPITAL CORP.
[Syllabus]
147 ALEXANDER V. SANDOVAL
[Syllabus]
There is no private right of action to enforce disparate-impact regulations promulgated under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
147 INYO COUNTY V. PAIUTE-SHOSHONE INDIANS OFBISHOP COMMUNITY OF BISHOP COLONY
[Syllabus]
1. Whether the doctrine of tribal sovereign immunity enable Indians tribes, their gambling casinos and other commercial businesses to prohibit the searching of their property by law enforcement officers for criminal evidence pertaining to the commission of off-reservation State crimes, when the search is pursuant to a search warrant issued upon probable cause. 2. Whether such a search by State law enforcement officers constitutes a violation of the tribe's civil rights that is actionable under 42 U.S.C. 1983. 3. Whether, if such a search is actionable under 42 U.S.C. 1983, the State law enforcement officers who conducted the search pursuant to the warrant are nonetheless entitled to the defense of qualified immunity.
147 BE&K CONSTR. CO. V. NLRB
[Syllabus]
Respondent National Labor Relations Board lacked authority to find that petitioner violated federal labor law by prosecuting against respondent unions an unsuccessful lawsuit with a retaliatory motive.
147
[Syllabus]
147
[Syllabus]
147 WAL-MART STORES, INC. V. DUKES
[Syllabus]
147 ORTIZ V. FIBREBOARD CORP.
[Syllabus]
147 ASTRA USA, INC. V.SANTA CLARA COUNTY
[Syllabus]