-
737 F.2d 690·
7th Cir.·
1984-06-21
·cited 91×
The court held that while a collective bargaining agreement's grievance procedure can satisfy due process, it failed to do so in this case due to administrative delays and limitations, and that defendants waived their right to appeal errors in jury instructions by failing to obje
-
528 F.2d 856·
1st Cir.·
1976-01-22
·cited 82×
The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that the defendants' failure to properly object to jury instructions under Fed.R.Civ.P. 51 precluded appellate review of the substantive legal issues.
-
850 F.2d 803·
1st Cir.·
1988-06-23
·cited 54×
The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the plaintiff failed to preserve its arguments regarding jury instructions, sufficiency of evidence, and the nature of the interstate commerce element due to procedural waivers.
-
575 F.2d 609·
8th Cir.·
1978-04-11
·cited 36×
The court held that the defendant could be liable for reasonably foreseeable republications of a defamatory report, but reversed the award of punitive damages due to lack of evidence of actual malice.
-
646 F.2d 22·
2d Cir.·
1981-03-12
·cited 33×
The court should reverse the judgment against Dr. Green and remand for a new trial on valid claims, as increasing his liability based on impermissible grounds is unjust.
-
733 F.2d 967·
1st Cir.·
1984-05-02
·cited 32×
The court held that the defendant waived his objections to jury instructions by failing to properly object after the charge, and that the given instruction was not plain error.
-
161 So. 2d 239·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1964-02-25
·cited 32×
Rod Pickard and George H. Henry were found liable for fraud and conspiracy in connection with the sale of a yacht, resulting in a $15,000 judgment against them jointly and severally. On appeal, the court affirmed the judgment against Pickard but reversed it against Henry, finding
-
378 F.2d 171·
8th Cir.·
1967-06-05
·cited 26×
The court held that admitting evidence of the company's net worth was prejudicial error, especially given the intertwined issues of compensatory and punitive damages and the lack of clear jury instructions.
-
815 F.2d 173·
1st Cir.·
1987-03-31
·cited 24×
The court held that the district court did not err in its jury instructions regarding political association rights and the 'but for' causation standard, and that any error in instructing on the state civil rights claim was harmless.
-
877 F.2d 1106·
1st Cir.·
1989-06-22
·cited 20×
The court held that the plaintiff waived his right to object to jury instructions by failing to comply with Fed.R.Civ.P. 51 and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to strike expert testimony or exclude EEOC reports.
-
787 F.2d 763·
1st Cir.·
1986-04-02
·cited 20×
The court held that the plaintiff forfeited her right to object to jury instructions due to procedural failures and that the admission of certain testimony was harmless error.
-
735 F.2d 1067·
8th Cir.·
1984-06-04
·cited 16×
The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the plaintiff's motions for a new trial or judgment notwithstanding the verdict, as the jury instructions and factual findings were proper and supported by evidence.
-
920 F.2d 1066·
1st Cir.·
1990-12-12
·cited 12×
The court affirmed the jury's verdict, holding that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions and that the appeal was frivolous.
-
892 F.2d 422·
5th Cir.·
1990-01-24
·cited 11×
The court held that the appellants waived their right to appeal issues regarding remand, bifurcation, and jury instructions due to failure to properly raise them below, and that the trial judge's conduct did not constitute plain error.
-
979 F.2d 612·
7th Cir.·
1992-11-12
·cited 10×
The court held that the defendant waived his claim of a breached plea agreement by failing to object at trial, and that consecutive sentences do not require explicit reasons on the record.
-
688 F.2d 78·
8th Cir.·
1982-09-22
·cited 10×
The court held that the trial court did not err in instructing the jury on the state of the art defense, and that other challenged jury instructions and the admission of deposition testimony were either properly preserved or permissible under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
-
696 F.2d 1162·
6th Cir.·
1983-01-04
·cited 8×
The court held that the conspiracy conviction must be reversed due to a vague indictment and insufficient jury instructions that failed to connect the law to the specific facts of the case. The court also remanded for resentencing on the possession and distribution counts due to
-
915 F.2d 764·
1st Cir.·
1990-09-28
·cited 6×
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial solely on the issue of damages, as there was no substantial indication that the inadequate damages award resulted from a compromise verdict on liability.
-
692 F.2d 205·
1st Cir.·
1982-11-08
·cited 2×
The court held that the district court did not err in excluding evidence of a pretrial agreement not raised in the pleadings and did not err in finding the defendant liable on the note despite prior jury instructions that suggested exhaustion of claims against another party was r
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-07-11
The court granted plaintiffs' motion regarding liability on the IRC claim but denied their motion for judgment as a matter of law on the FLSA claims, finding the jury's verdict was supported by sufficient evidence.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-07-11
The court granted in part and denied in part the plaintiffs' motion, finding that while the jury's verdict on the FLSA claims would not be disturbed, the plaintiff was entitled to damages on the IRC claim based on the jury's finding of fraudulent and willful issuance of informati