Skip to main content
· 2/23/1987

Beverly HOGAN, Appellant, v. AMERICAN TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH COMPANY, Appellee

Citations

  • 812 F.2d 409
  • 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 2402
  • 42 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 36,946
  • 43 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 210

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that testimony that merely tells the factfinder what result to reach is not helpful to the trier of fact
  • explaining trial court may exclude opinion testimony if the terms used such as “discriminate” have a separate, distinct, and special legal meaning

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Heaney, Wollman, Magill

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.