City of Cleveland v. Peter Kiewit Sons' Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• “The remarks were persistently made over the recurring and almost constant objection of counsel for the appellant.”
• “The remarks were persistently made over the recurring and almost constant objection of counsel for the appellant.”
• \The remarks were persistently made over the recurring and almost constant objection of counsel for the appellant\
• “Knowledge of defendant’s insurance has traditionally been treated as fruit of the forbidden tree.”
• “[W]hile mention of the contractually-mandated insurance may have been inevitable, it was prejudicial error for counsel for the City to inject into the trial idea that Kiewit had insurance which would cover any damages the defendant would be obliged to pay.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).