ACEMLA v. Copyright Royalty Tribunal

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that a trial court is required, sua sponte, to grant a new trial if “a verdict reflects inconsistencies on its face indicating either that the jury was in a state of confusion or abused its power”
• finding waiver when court inquired whether counsel had anything to raise before excusing jury and counsel replied negatively
• finding waiver when court inquired whether counsel had anything to raise before excusing jury and counsel replied negatively
• collecting cases in accord with Stancill from the First, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, and Eleventh circuits
• agreeing with the reasoning in Stancill and holding that failure to “object to the jury verdict on the alleged ground of inconsistency constituted a waiver of such contention on appeal”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).