Essenburg v. Russell

How courts have described this case

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

• in rejecting a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence in an action at law for fraud the court stated that the factual findings were not \contrary to the clear preponderance of the proofs\
• in rejecting a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence in an action at law for fraud the court stated that the factual findings were not “contrary to the clear preponderance of the proofs”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).