← All Authorities
United States appealstort rome ii

Gasperini v Center for Humanities Inc

518 U.S. 415 (1996)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtUS Supreme Court
Year1996
StatusBinding authority

Summary

State law standards for reviewing excessive jury verdicts apply in federal diversity cases, but federal appellate review remains for abuse of discretion only.

Key Principle

State law standards for reviewing jury verdicts as excessive apply in federal diversity cases, but the federal appellate standard of review remains abuse of discretion.

Area of Law

procedure

Related Cases

Getswift Ltd v Webb (2022) 276 CLR 553

High Court of Australia held there is no power to make a common fund order in favour of litigation funders at the interlocutory stage of a class action.

UBS AG v Tyne (2018) 265 CLR 77

Anshun estoppel bars relitigation where it was unreasonable not to raise the issue in earlier proceedings; re-litigation may also constitute abuse of process.

Palmer v Ayres (2017) 259 CLR 478

High Court of Australia held the reflective loss principle (Prudential Assurance rule) does not apply in Australia, permitting shareholders to recover losses independently of the company.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Gasperini v Center for Humanities Inc and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Gasperini v Center for Humanit...