Curran v. Kroll

How courts have described this case

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

• ‘‘[w]hether the evi- dence presented by the plaintiff was sufficient to with- stand a motion for a directed verdict is a question of law’’
• ‘‘it is well established that a plaintiff has the same right to submit a weak case as he has to submit a strong one’’ (internal quotation marks omitted)
• ‘‘This evidence was admitted in full, without limitation. In the absence of any limiting instruction, the jury was entitled to draw any inferences from the evidence that it reasonably would support.’’
• ‘‘This evidence was admitted in full, without limitation. In the absence of any limiting instruction, the jury was entitled to draw any inferences from the evidence that it reason- ably would support.’’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).