Cain v. Green Tweed & Co., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• describing that the doctrine did not apply where the affidavit did not contradict the witness’s first deposition but instead supplemented the testimony with additional information not elicited from opposing counsel
• describing sham affidavit doctrine but declining to reach doctrine on facts of case
• product identification sufficient where employee testified that he knew manufacturer’s product contained “Palmetto” asbestos because packaging of product was labeled “Palmetto”
• “We need not address the validity or scope of the [sham affidavit] doctrine, because we find it to be inapplicable in this case.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).