MOORE ET AL.

v.

VOLKSWAGENWERK, A. G., ET AL.

Citator

Cited By (37 total)

• United States v. Roberto José Maldonado-Rivera, 922 F.2d 934 (2d Cir. 1990)
  …n in a conspiracy with the requisite criminal intent may be established through circumstantial evidence). Pieces of evidence must be viewed not in isolation but in conjunction. United States v. Brown, 776 F. 2d 397, 403 (2d Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1141, 106 S.Ct. 1793, 90 L.Ed.2d 339 (1986); United States v. Geaney, 417 F. 2d 1116, 1121 (2d Cir.1969), cert. denied, 397 U.S. [*979] 1028, 90 S.Ct. 1276, 25 L.Ed.2d 539 (1970). The weight of the evidence is a matter for argument to the jury, not a gro…
• United States v. Tutino, 883 F.2d 1125 (2d Cir. 1989)
  …” The district court has “broad discretion” in the matter of the admission or exclusion of expert testimony, and will be affirmed unless the decision is “manifestly erroneous.” United, States v. Brown, 776 F. 2d 397, 400 (2d Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1141, 106 S.Ct. 1793, 90 L.Ed.2d 339 (1986) (quoting Salem v. United States Lines Co., 370 U.S. 31, 35, 82 S.Ct. 1119, 1122, 8 L.Ed.2d 313 [1962]); see Hamling v. United States, 418 U.S. 87, 108, 94 S.Ct. 2887, 2903, 41 L.Ed.2d 590 (1974) (district court…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• United States v. Athanasios Theodoropoulos, 866 F.2d 587 (3d Cir. 1989)
  …et the helpfulness requirement. Thus, in a case similar to this, the court held that expert testimony that a defendant was a “steerer” in a drug organization was admissible, United States v. Brown, 776 F. 2d 397, 400-02 (2d Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1141, 106 S.Ct. 1793, 90 L.Ed.2d 339 (1986). On the other hand, an expert’s repeated testimony that defendants had engaged in “fraudulent, manipulative practices” was improper under Rule 704, not because it represented an ultimate factual conclusion bu…