Joe Morgan v. Bill Woessner, and Clay Searle Los Angeles City, (Two Cases)

ORDER

The opinion filed September 15, 1992, 975 F.2d 629 , is withdrawn, and the attached opinion and dissent are filed in its place.

OPINION

I.

OVERVIEW

Joe Morgan, an ex-professional baseball player and television commentator, brought a section 1983 suit against Los Angeles police *1248 men Clay Searle and Bill Woessner and the City of Los Angeles for harm associated with Officer Searle’s stop of Morgan at Los Ange-les International Airport (LAX) in March of 1988. At the first trial, the jury found that Morgan had not been unlawfully detained. The district court, however, granted Morgan’s motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) and a new trial because it found that Searle’s stop of Morgan was unconstitutional as a matter of law.

At the second trial, the district court instructed the jury that the initial contact between Morgan and Searle was unconstitutional, and instructed it to determine only whether Morgan’s subsequent arrest was lawful and whether Morgan suffered harm in connection with any unconstitutional conduct, and to consider Morgan’s state law claims of false imprisonment, battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The jury found…

dissenting.

I respectfully dissent from portions of part IV.B of the majority opinion. I agree with my colleagues that, in our first opinion in this case, we erroneously granted a remittitur on the federal punitive damages award, reducing it from $300,000 to $100,000. I also agree that the state punitive damages award must be remanded under Adams v. Murakami, 54 Cal.3d 105 , 284 Cal.Rptr. 318 , 813 P.2d 1348 (1991). I part company with the majority, however, over its interpretation of the Supreme Court’s decision in Pacific Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Haslip, 499 U.S. 1 , 111 S.Ct. 1032 , 113 L.Ed.2d 1 (1991).

Searle and the City make two separate arguments with respect to the size of the punitive damages award in this case. First, they question whether California’s procedure for reviewing such awards comports with due process. 1 Second, they claim that the punitive damages award is generally “excessive.” I address each of these arguments in turn.

1. The Due Process Claim

a. Interpreting Haslip

In Haslip , the Court considered whether a punitive damages award of $840,000 in an insurance fraud case violated due process. In finding that it did not, the Court favorably considered…

997 F.2d 1244 Joe MORGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Bill WOESSNER, Defendant, and Clay Searle; Los Angeles City, Defendants-Appellants (Two Cases). Nos. 91-55728, 91-55863. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted July 9, 1992. Opinion Filed Sept. 15, 1992. Opinion Withdrawn June 10, 1993. Opinion Filed June 10, 1993. Thomas C. Hokinson, Sr. Asst. City Atty. and Richard M. Helgeson, Asst. City Atty., Los Angeles, CA, for defendants-appellants. William A. Barnes and Edwin J. Wilson, Jr., Erickson, Beasley, Hewitt & Wilson, Oakland, CA, for plaintiff-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Before: SNEED and D.W. NELSON, Circuit Judges, and ROLL, District Judge. * ORDER The opinion filed September 15, 1992, 975 F.2d 629 , is withdrawn, and the attached opinion and dissent are filed in its place. OPINION SNEED, Circuit Judge: I. OVERVIEW 1 Joe Morgan, an ex-professional baseball player and television commentator, brought a section 1983 suit against Los Angeles policemen Clay Searle and Bill Woessner and the City of Los Angeles for harm associated with Officer Searle's stop of Morgan at Los Angeles…