Crane v. R. R. Crane Investment Corp., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• addressing defendant's claim that verdicts were legally inconsistent without specifying whether claim was raised in trial court or preserved for review
• addressing defendant’s claim that verdicts were legally inconsistent without specifying whether claim was raised in trial court or preserved for review
• \[a]ssuming arguendo that a Doyle violation occurred\ and concluding \that it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt\
• Doyle violation harmless when defendant’s silence not focus of prosecution’s cross-examination or closing argument, reference was minor portion of cross-examination and defendant’s silence not highlighted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).