The award of emotional distress damages to appellees was reversed. The court held that emotional distress damages in connection with property damages are not compensable; and the available damages for defective construction are limited to the cost of repairing the home, or the diminution in value.

The reviewing court reversed and remanded the appellate court's judgment compelling plaintiffs, family members and estate representatives, to submit to arbitration with defendant health maintenance organization (HMO). Because material fact questions existed as to whether defendant HMO's conduct in delaying arbitration was actually fraudulent and constituted a waiver of its right to compel arbitration, reversal...

The judgment upholding certification of the subscriber's class was reversed. 5-4 Decision; 1 Dissent.

The judgment was affirmed and the case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion, on grounds that respondents, as classified civil servants, had to be afforded due process in form of pre-termination opportunity to respond, coupled with post-termination administrative proceedings as provided by Ohio statute.

The court affirmed the judgment that defendant did not violate the Unfair Practices Act and affirmed the judgment that defendant might have violated the unfair competition law, holding that defendant did not act with the purpose of injuring plaintiffs and that, because the applicable test for an unfair competition law action was stated for the first time by the court, plaintiff was allowed to present additional evidence...

The Court overturned Plessy v. Ferguson and the "separate but equal" doctrine, finding that it had no place in public education. Segregation was a denial of the equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment. Separate educational facilities were inherently unequal.

The court approved the decision of the district court directing a new trial, holding that the intentional nondisclosure by petitioners, accident victims, of the identity of their expert witness, despite the existence of a pre-trial order requiring such disclosure, prejudiced respondent to the extent that a new trial was warranted.

The Court reversed the decision and remanded the case because it found that the county could not be held liable for the sheriff's isolated decision to hire the police officer without adequate screening because respondent did not demonstrate that the decision reflected a conscious disregard that the officer would use excessive force.

The court affirmed both the judgment and the postjudgment orders.

The court reversed the order of the appellate division and answered the certified question in the negative. The decision to affirm the striking of portions of the employees' interrogatories was not properly made.

Judgment reversed, vacated, and remanded. 4-2 decision; 1 concurrence; 1 dissent.

Judgment vacated; case remanded. 6-3 decision; 1 concurrence; 2 dissents.

Bias may be established by providing evidence that the physician's practice was based entirely on patients treated pursuant to letters of protection.

The Court affirmed the judgment of the lower court.

The Court affirmed the state appellate court.

The court vacated the lower appellate court's judgment and remanded the case for a determination of whether enforcement of the forum-selection clause was unreasonable.

The Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeals that the bankruptcy court lacked jurisdiction to enter the judgment was affirmed. 5-4 Decision; 1 Concurrence; 1 Dissent.

Judgment reversed and case remanded. 9-0 Decision; 3 concurrences.

The Court affirmed the judgment convicting petitioners of armed robbery because their motion to suppress evidence was properly denied where petitioners' own rights were not violated. Petitioners had no legitimate expectation of privacy in areas of a car in which they claimed no property or possessory interest.

The court vacated the judgment of the state supreme court that had set aside respondent's conviction for kidnapping, robbery, and murder. The court held that petitioner had not established that respondent's incriminating response was the product of words or actions on the part of the police that they should have known were reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response.

The judgment denying the alien's motion for a stay of removal pending review was vacated, and the case was remanded for consideration of the alien's motion for a stay under the traditional standards for a stay of proceedings. 7-2 Decision; 1 Dissent.

The court reversed the summary judgment, affirmed summary adjudications as to three causes of action against the supervisor, affirmed summary adjudications as to a waived claim of disability discrimination and claims of fraud and battery, and otherwise reversed the summary adjudications.

The order finding that defendant's antitrust claims were not arbitrable was reversed. The antitrust claim alone did not invalidate the forum selection or arbitration clauses. Arbitration provided competent arbitrators, and issues were resolved using the national law where the claim arose. There was also a strong presumption favoring arbitration in international commerce.

The rule was discharged.

Managing agent production order, order granting terminating and monetary sanctions, and default judgment vacated.