Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Tenth Circuit· 12/31/2013

Eller v. Trans Union, LLC

Citations

  • 739 F.3d 467
  • 87 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 491
  • 2013 WL 6851127
  • 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 25852

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting that the rule is “intended to permit remote testimony when a witness’s inability to attend trial is the result of ‘unexpected reasons’”
  • noting that the rule is “intended to permit remote testimony when a witness’s inability to attend trial is the result of ‘unexpected reasons’”
  • applying four-part plain-error test where plaintiff challenged instruction on appeal that he failed to object to below
  • applying Rule 43(a), Fed. R. Civ. P., and determining that a party had not made an adequate showing of grounds to permit telephonic testimony
  • applying Rule 43(a), Fed. R. Civ. P., and determining that a party had not made an adequate showing of grounds to permit telephonic testimony
  • applying Rule 43(a), Fed. R. Civ. P., and determining that a party had not made an adequate showing of grounds to permit telephonic testimony

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hartz, Matheson, McKAY

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

25 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Eller v. Trans Union, LLC

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.