Castellano-Vega v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an affidavit held “no weight” because the affiant’s statements that an employer’s actions were discriminatory and retaliatory were not based on personal knowledge
• rejecting an affidavit as having “no weight” where “[t]here is no evidence to suggest that [the affiant] had personal knowledge . . . .”
• ascribing “no weight” to an affiant’s averment that an employer’s actions were discriminatory and retaliatory, where there was no evidence that the averment was based on facts of which the affiant had personal knowledge
• ascribing “no weight” to an affiant’s averment that an employer’s actions were discriminatory and retaliatory, where there was no evidence that the inference was based on facts of which the affiant had personal knowledge
• Because the affidavit had no “first-hand evidence” for its assertions, it “was entitled to no weight.”
• “A [lay] witness may testify to a matter only if evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the mattet[.]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).