Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

BMW v. Gore

Docket No.: 94-896
Argued: October 11, 1995
Decided: May 20, 1996

Topics:

Due Process, Economic Activity, Due Process, Fourteenth Amendment, Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, antitrust, attorney fees, habeas, habeas corpus, judicial review, patent, sentencing guidelines, stare decisis, trademark, warrantless search

PartyNames: BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, INC. v. GORE Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Alabama.
Petitioner: BMW
Respondent: Gore

Supreme Court Docket

BMW
v.
Gore
517 U.S. 559 (1996)
Other Citations: 116 S.Ct. 1589134 L.Ed.2d 809 (517 U.S.
Question:

Assuming that Gore's punitive damage award was grossly excessive, does the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause protect BMW from paying the award?

BMW v. Gore
ORAL ARGUMENT

October 11, 1995

Holding: reversed and remanded
Decision: Decision: 5 votes for BMW, 4 vote(s) against

BMW v. Gore
Case Documents

1Opinion in BMW v. Gore
2Opinion in BMW v. Gore
Additional documents for this case are pending review.