Grisanti v. Cioffi

Type

Opinion of the Court

Per curiam

Yes — no individual author

Filed

May 31, 2002

Case

Grisanti v. Cioffi

Case status

Decided

Source The opinion is per curiam: issued in the name of the court, with no individual author. This is a fact about the opinion, not missing data.

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

SUMMARY ORDER UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED. In March 1999, plaintiff-appellee Gina Grisanti filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, alleging that defendant-appellant William Cioffi had raped her on four occasions in February and May 1998. She claimed that these rapes and other threatening and harassing conduct by Cioffi constituted a violation of the Violence Against Women Act (“VAWA”), 42 U.S.C. § 13981 , as well as assault and battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress. After the Supreme Court declared the VAWA unconstitutional in United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 , 120 S.Ct. 1740 , 146 L.Ed.2d 658 (2000), the case proceeded to trial on the two supplemental state law tort claims. The jury returned a verdict for Grisanti awarding $2.5 million in compensatory damages and permitting the court to award an additional sum in punitive damages. On cross motions following the verdict, the court reduced the total compensatory damages to $1.25 million and added $416,667 in punitive damages and $3,956.27 *655 in costs, …

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.