Opening Brief for Appellant/Cross-Appellee - Appellate.net

Inc., 357 F.3d 375 (3d Cir. 2004). It held that, as a matter of law, Sunrise could
not have tortiously interfered with that contract, because it was acting as RHA’s
agent, and an agent cannot interfere with a contract between its principal and a
third party. Id. at 385-88. The Court affirmed the $109,000 compensatory award
for tortious interference with the relationship between CGB and its therapists
(which Sunrise has paid). Because it was impossible to tell what portion of the
$1.3 million punitive award was attributable to the invalid claim, the Court
remanded for a new trial limited to the issues of liability for and amount of
punitive damages. At the second trial, the jury awarded CGB $30 million in
punitive damages.
On January 28, 2005, Sunrise timely moved for a new trial, contending
among other things, that the jury’s finding of liability for punitive damages was
against the weight of the evidence and that the verdict was the product of passion
and prejudice. In the alternative, Sunrise asked the court to reduce the award to a
constitutionally permissible amount. The district court denied Sunrise’s motion for
a new trial but reduced the punitive damages from $30 million to $2 million. In
the current appeal, Sunrise is challenging that $2 million judgment. The plaintiff
has filed a cross-appeal, seeking reinstatement of the verdict or an enhancement of
the existing $2 million figure.
4