Andrea Jones v. Southpeak Interactive Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “the term ‘shall include’ sets a floor, not a ceiling” and that “[c]ourts have repeatedly indicated that ‘shall include’ is not equivalent to ‘limited to.’”
• noting that it is within the district court’s discretion to set aside a jury verdict and order a new trial when “it is not possible to reconcile the [jury’s] findings”
• allowing noneconomic damages for violation of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act whistleblower provision relying on similar relief and language from the False Claims Act
• joining the Fifth and Tenth Circuits in concluding that emotional distress damages are available under Sarbanes-Oxley as “special damages”
• joining the Fifth and Tenth Circuits in concluding that emotional distress damages are available under Sarbanes-Oxley as “special damages”
• applying an across-the-board reduction of 10% to attorney fees due to lack of contemporaneous record keeping

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).