Filed: Jul. 09, 2012
Latest Update: Jul. 09, 2012
Summary: ORDER ROBERT C. JONES, District Judge. BACKGROUND This case is on remand again from the Ninth Circuit. (Ninth Circuit Op. (#470)). In the original case, the jury returned a verdict for Plaintiffs Ashley Andrews and Ashtonwood Stud Associates against Defendants Robert Raphaelson and Kentucky Blue Stables for conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraud. (Verdict Form (#313)). The jury awarded a verdict of $285,074 in compensatory damages and $1,600,000 in punitive damages against Raphaelson
Summary: ORDER ROBERT C. JONES, District Judge. BACKGROUND This case is on remand again from the Ninth Circuit. (Ninth Circuit Op. (#470)). In the original case, the jury returned a verdict for Plaintiffs Ashley Andrews and Ashtonwood Stud Associates against Defendants Robert Raphaelson and Kentucky Blue Stables for conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraud. (Verdict Form (#313)). The jury awarded a verdict of $285,074 in compensatory damages and $1,600,000 in punitive damages against Raphaelson...
More
ORDER
ROBERT C. JONES, District Judge.
BACKGROUND
This case is on remand again from the Ninth Circuit. (Ninth Circuit Op. (#470)). In the original case, the jury returned a verdict for Plaintiffs Ashley Andrews and Ashtonwood Stud Associates against Defendants Robert Raphaelson and Kentucky Blue Stables for conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraud. (Verdict Form (#313)). The jury awarded a verdict of $285,074 in compensatory damages and $1,600,000 in punitive damages against Raphaelson. (Id. at 4-5). Upon motion from Defendant Raphaelson, this Court reduced the punitive damages award from $1,600,000 to $855,222 pursuant to Nevada Revised Statute § 42.005(1)(a). (Mot. for Reduction of Punitive Damages (#314) at 2; Order (#354) at 2). This Court entered judgment "awarding plaintiffs $795,699 in compensatory damages with credit for $510,625 already paid pursuant to the Court's earlier grant of partial summary judgment on the plaintiffs' conversion claim; and awarding $855,222 in punitive damages for [Raphaelson's] oppression, fraud, or malice." (Judgment (#367)).
On the first appeal, the Ninth Circuit affirmed this Court's grant of partial summary judgment to Andrews, but reversed the Court's reduction of punitive damages pursuant to NRS § 42.005. (Ninth Circuit Op. (#448) at 5). In reversing this Court's punitive damages reduction, the Ninth Circuit held that
[a]lthough the jury reported $285,074 in compensatory damages on its verdict form, it was specifically instructed to deduct $510,625 from its total compensatory damages award before reporting it on that form. Accordingly, we must presume that the jury's total compensatory damages award equaled $795,699 ... The jury's punitive damages award of $1,600,000 is less than three times $795,699, so Nevada Revised Statutes section 42.005 cannot provide a basis for limiting the punitive damages awarded in this case.
(Id. at 4). The Ninth Circuit remanded "with instructions either to reinstate the $1,600,000 punitive damages award or to specifically explain its basis for limiting the award, mindful that a reviewing court must `assume that the jury believed all the evidence favorable to the prevailing party and drew all reasonable inferences in her favor.'" (Id. at 5).
On remand, this Court found that the award of $1,600,000 in punitive damages was excessive as a matter of law under Guaranty Nat'l Ins. Co v. Potter, 912 P.2d 267, 273 (Nev. 1996) and reduced the judgment for punitive damages from $1,600,000 to $875,000. (Remand Order (#460) at 2-3).
Plaintiffs appealed again. On remand, the Ninth Circuit held that this Court had used an abrogated state law excessiveness standard. (Ninth Circuit Op. (#470) at 2-3). The Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded with instructions to reinstate the jury's punitive damages award. (Id. at 5). The Court now reinstates the jury's punitive damages award of $1,600,000.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that the jury's punitive damages award of $1,600,00 is reinstated.
The Clerk of the Court shall enter an amended judgment accordingly.
