O'Connor
Provident Life & Accident Insurance Co. v. O'Connor
Opinion
Lead Opinion
*823 MEMORANDUM **
Defendant and Counter-claimant Harry J. O’Connor appeals from the judgment of the district court. He challenges two evidentiary rulings as well as the jury’s verdict of disability insurance fraud and its award of punitive damages. O’Connor also appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgment against O’Connor on his counterclaims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 1332 and affirm the judgment and rulings of the district court with regard to all issues except the question whether the punitive damages award was excessive. As the facts and prior proceedings are known to the parties, we restate them only as necessary to explain our disposition.
I. Evidentiary Rulings
Evidentiary rulings are reviewed for abuse of discretion. Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 , 174 n. 1, 117 S.Ct. 644 , 136 L.Ed.2d 574 (1997); United States v. Fleming, 215 F.3d 930, 938 (9th Cir. 2000). To reverse on the basis of an erroneous evidentiary ruling, we must conclude not only that the district court abused its discretion, but also that the error resulted in “some prejudice.” Defenders of Wildlife v. Bernal, 204 F.3d 920, 927-28 (9th Cir.2000).