Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Plazzo v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance
Plazzo v. Nationwide Mut. Ins., 498 U.S. 950 (1990)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1990-10-29
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- holding that a trademark infringement case is “exceptional” and justifies the award of reasonable a attorney’s fee if defendants infringement was malicious, fraudulent, deliberate, and wilful
- reversing jury verdict for the plaintiff for $20 million in compensatory damages and punitive damages of $75 million, and granting judgment n.o.v. to the defendant after concluding that the plaintiff's evidence was inadmissible under Richardson
- reversing jury verdict for the plaintiff for $20 million in compen satory damages and punitive damages of $75 million, and granting judgment n.o.v. to the defendant after concluding that the plaintiffs evidence was inadmissible under Richardson
- "the evidence upon which plaintiffs propose to rely — statistical evidence of widespread discrimination — is common to the class as a whole”
- "[t]he Court concludes that the Deferred Compensation Plan provides retirement income to employees and is an employee pension benefit plan under ERISA"
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Plazzo v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 72 opinions
C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
JUSTICE White and Justice Marshall would grant certiorari.