POE

v.

UNITED STATES; PACIFIC TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH CO. V. PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF CALIFORNIA ET AL.; GENERAL TELEPHONE COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA V. PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF CALIFORNIA ET AL.; KIRK V. UNITED STATES; ADAMS V. FLORIDA; GLOVER V. DOLAN, SHERIFF; JONES V. UNITED STATES; OLVERA V. UNITED STATES; PATTERSON V. THOMPSON, WARDEN, ET AL.; MORROW V. IGLEBURGER ET AL.; PORTER V. CONTINENTAL BANK ET AL.; GREENE V. UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Palazzo v. Gulf OIL Corp., 764 F.2d 1381 (11th Cir. 1985)
  …ociation with the partnership or corporation. The general rule applies even where the person seeking to represent the corporation is its president and major stockholder. In re Las Colinas Development Corp., 585 F. 2d 7 (1st Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 931, 99 S.Ct. 1268, 59 L.Ed.2d 487 (1979). Nevertheless, plaintiff Frank Palazzo argues that the corporation’s assignment of its claim to him operates to avoid this long standing policy. In National Independent Theater Distributors, Inc. v. Buena Vista…
• Sammie J. Rodgers v. Fisher Body Division, 739 F.2d 1102 (6th Cir. 1984)
  …over for out-of-pocket expenses and emotional distress, but there must be sufficient evidence to support such a finding.” Morrow v. Igleburger, 584 F. 2d 767, 769 (6th Cir.1978) cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1118, 99 S.Ct. 1027, 59 L.Ed.2d 78, reh. denied, 440 U.S. 931, 99 S.Ct. 1271, 59 L.Ed.2d 489 (1979). Plaintiff’s evidence of mental distress is too slight to súpport a sizeable damages award for the intangible injury of mental harm. While jurors might easily infer that going on welfare and losing one’s car wo…
• Frank v. Bloom, 634 F.2d 1245 (10th Cir. 1980)
  …ument. This contention is that courts may exercise discretion to award interest on unliquidated damages. Lightcap v. Mobil Oil Corp., 221 Kan. 448, 562 P. 2d 1, Kan.Sup.Ct. (1977), cert. denied 434 U.S. 876, 98 S.Ct. 228, 54 L.Ed.2d 156; reh. denied 440 U.S. 931, 99 S.Ct. 1272, 59 L.Ed.2d 489 (1979), quoting 22 Am.Jur.2d, Damages, Sec. 185. We perceive no need to add to the jury’s award in order to render Mr. Frank’s compensation “fair”. To the contrary, we feel that the jury’s award more than adequately co…