Apr. 30, 2008
Instruction Manual
Does the ever-changing world of punitive damages excuse, at least to some extent, the wording of a jury instruction.
Rex Heeseman
JAMS
555 W 5th St Fl 32
Los Angeles , CA 90013-1055
Phone: (213) 253-9772
Fax: (213) 620-0100
Email: rheeseman@jamsdar.com
Stanford Univ Law School
Rex Heeseman retired from the Los Angeles Count Superior Court bench in 2014. He is at JAMS, Los Angeles. Besides speaking at various MCLE programs, he co-authors The Rutter Group's practice guide on "Insurance Litigation." From 2002 to 2015, he was an adjunct professor at Loyola Law School.
By Rex Heeseman
This article appears on Page 5
Last year, in remanding the case to the Oregon Supreme Court, a five-justice majority of the U.S. Supreme Court promulgated the important decision of Philip Morris USA v. Williams, 127 S. Ct. 1057 (2007) ("Williams"). Earlier this year, the Oregon Supreme Court found improper the key harm-to-others jury instruction, which the defendant Philip Morris had sought ...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In