Eustice v. Rupert

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the standard of review of the trial court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion for a new trial is even more stringent since the granting of a new trial is in the discretion of the trial judge... our standard of review is abuse of discretion
• noting the question of whether an actor's conduct is wanton is ordinarily one for the trier of fact
• \Failure to object to erroneous statements of the law or inaccurate statements of the facts... is evidence of waiver.\
• “The question of wanton conduct (as with a question of negligence) is ordinarily one for the trier of fact.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).