Dunn v. Hovi

1 F.3d 1371 (3rd Cir. 1993)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

William Dunn (P), a former pipe installer at Hess Oil Virgin Islands Corporation (HOVIC), filed this action against D as well as other manufacturers of asbestos-containing products, alleging personal injuries caused by exposure to asbestos. Following a trial in which liability and compensatory damages were determined before the issue of punitive damages, the jury awarded Dunn $1.3 million in compensatory damages and $25 million in punitive damages against the sole remaining defendant, D, the distributor and later manufacturer of Kaylo, an asbestos-containing pipe covering. D filed post-trial motions pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 50(b) and 59 requesting a Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict or, in the alternative, a new trial. The district court denied the motion for JNOV but conditioned the denial of the motion for a new trial on Dunn's acceptance of a remittitur of the compensatory award to $500,000 and the punitive award to $2 million. Dunn v. Owens-Corning Fiberglass, 774 F. Supp. 929, 951-52 (D.V.I. 1991). Dunn accepted the remittitur, and D appealed. A panel of this court heard argument on D's appeal on April 22, 1992, and issued an opinion affirming the compensatory damages award and remitting the punitive damages award to $1 million. Thereafter, the court granted D's petition for rehearing in banc, limited to the punitive damages issue. D directed its argument to its contention that multiple awards of punitive damages in asbestos-related injury cases should be prohibited as a matter of Virgin Islands law or federal due process.