Anthony Hill v. Daniel M. Tangherlini

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that warden was insulated from liability because he believed medical staff were addressing plaintiff's medical needs
• holding that although deposition testimony is inherently self- serving it can be “perfectly admissible evidence through which a party tries to present its side of the story at summary judgment”
• holding that district court improperly failed to consider deponent’s statements based on personal knowledge
• observing that affidavits can still be “perfectly admissible evidence through which a party tries to present its side of the story at summary judgment”
• noting that “[d]eposition testimony, affidavits, responses to interrogatories, and other written statements by their nature are self-serving”
• explaining that the employer’s reason for discharge must be accepted unless shown to be a “mask to hide unlawful discrimination”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).