Angieri v. Musso

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that because the defendant was not adversely affected, the denial of a directed verdict of laches could not have been cross-appealed in a previous challenge to the district court’s judgment of invalidity
• finding “[ljaches is an equitable defense which depends on consideration of all of the facts in the particular case”
• stating that the law of the case doctrine “prevent[s] the relitigation of issues that have been decided and . . . ensure[s] that trial courts follow the decisions of appellate courts . . . on a question made previously during the case”
• stating that the law of the case doctrine “prevent[s] the relitigation of issues that have been decided and . . . ensure[s] that trial courts follow the decisions of appellate courts . . . on a question made previously during the case”
• stating the doctrine did not preclude revisiting a non--appealable denial of summary judgment if “further reflection may allow a better informed ruling in accordance with the conscience of the court”
• defendant testified that he invested money into his business rather than selling it on reliance upon plaintiff’s representations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).