Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
United States decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The court excluded part of Dr. Warmink’s causation testimony and granted summary judgment to American Airlines, dismissing the case with prejudice.
The Supreme Court held that a trial court may bar defense counsel from discussing a defendant’s ongoing testimony during an overnight recess while allowing other consultation.
The Supreme Court reversed a Fourth Circuit habeas ruling, holding that under AEDPA the Maryland court reasonably found undisclosed Brady evidence immaterial in light of strong evidence of guilt.
Dougherty, J., dissents, saying Pyeritz does not foreclose Erie’s promissory estoppel claim and reliance damages may be available.
The Supreme Court of Ohio held that proximate cause is a separate element of aggravated vehicular assault, and affirmed Balmert’s conviction on sufficient evidence.
This Court had jurisdiction because the OCCA made application of Oklahoma’s PCPA contingent on an antecedent federal-law determination rejecting the attorney general’s Napue confession; on the merits the prosecution violated Napue by knowingly allowing false testimony from the State’s key witness about his lithium prescription/psychiatric treatment and failing to correct it, and the false testimony was material because it could reasonably have affected the jury’s assessment of the sole direct evidence (Sneed); remedy is a new trial, therefore the OCCA judgment is reversed and the case remande…
Source excerpt
The Court of Chancery will appoint a D.R.E. 706 expert on cGMP compliance issues after trial, but not on the contract-interpretation question whether materials were for human use.
The Supreme Court held that Payne v. Tennessee supplied clearly established due process law for AEDPA review of highly prejudicial evidence, vacating and remanding.
The magistrate judge recommended excluding several defense valuation experts and limiting evidence tied to an incorrect larger parcel, while denying as moot defendants’ challenge to plaintiff’s expert.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted allocatur in a dispute over promissory estoppel, alleged negligent spoliation, and subrogation limits in a property-loss case.
Explore more
