Bowen v. Boughner

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding the proponent had not met the burden of showing admissibility when the challenge was raised in the reply brief and the proponent “did not request leave to file a sur-reply in order to rebut such arguments.”
• finding that the plaintiff offered statements as proof of the truth of the matter asserted when it relied upon the statements to prove that the defendant “intentionally targeted older employees for reclassification and layoffs because of an age-based bias”
• “That the opposing party believes that different data should have been used, additional factors considered, or alternate conclusions reached does not render contrary expert opinions irrelevant and unreliable.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).