For Your Data Bankers Life & Casualty Co. V. Crenshaw Instance Brief
August 25, 2019
Edit
Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. Crenshaw instance brief summary
486 U.S. 71 (1988)
CASE FACTS
On appeal, the insurer alleged that the punitive damages honor violated the Eighth Amendment, the Due Process Clause, as well as the Contract Clause and that Mississippi's penalisation statute, Miss. Code Ann. § 11-3-23 (Supp. 1987), which required the insurer, equally an unsuccessful appellant from a coin judgment, to pay an additional penalisation of xv per centum of the judgment violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The Court affirmed the nation supreme court's judgment denying the insurer's challenge to Mississippi's penalisation statute nether the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Suggested constabulary schoolhouse course of written report materials, hornbooks, as well as guides for Civil Procedure
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
486 U.S. 71 (1988)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Appellant insurer sought review of the determination of the Supreme Court of Mississippi, which affirmed a jury honor inwards favor of appellee insured inwards the amount of the policy plus punitive damages as well as assessed a penalisation of xv per centum of the judgment pursuant to Mississippi's penalisation statute, Miss. Code Ann. § 11-3-23 (Supp. 1987), inwards the insured's activity against the insurer for damages equally a upshot of the loss of his pes inwards an accident.CASE FACTS
On appeal, the insurer alleged that the punitive damages honor violated the Eighth Amendment, the Due Process Clause, as well as the Contract Clause and that Mississippi's penalisation statute, Miss. Code Ann. § 11-3-23 (Supp. 1987), which required the insurer, equally an unsuccessful appellant from a coin judgment, to pay an additional penalisation of xv per centum of the judgment violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
DISCUSSION
- The Court declined to address the insurer's constitutional challenges to the punitive damages award, asset that the insurer's full general nurture of the U.S. Constitution inwards the lower courts was non sufficient to save the issues as well as that comity as well as the ask for a properly developed tape on appeal weighed inwards favor of the Court's determination declining to address the issues.
- The Court addressed the insurer's challenge to Miss. Code Ann. § 11-3-23 (Supp. 1987) as well as held that the statute did non violate the Equal Protection Clause where the penalisation was rationally related to the achievement of legitimate nation interests, including discouraging frivolous appeals as well as conserving judicial resources, as well as was reasonably tailored to the state's legitimate ends.
CONCLUSION
The Court affirmed the nation supreme court's judgment denying the insurer's challenge to Mississippi's penalisation statute nether the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Suggested constabulary schoolhouse course of written report materials, hornbooks, as well as guides for Civil Procedure
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.