Evans v. General Motors Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that trial court improperly denied plaintiffs’ constitutional right to jury trial on trade secrets claims and reversing without conducting harmless error analysis
• courts must refrain from addressing constitutional questions unless their resolution is unavoidable or absolutely necessary to deciding case
• court’s ruling on particular issue can be inferred through the substantive effect of the court’s orders and memorandum of decision
• court’s ruling on particular issue can be inferred through substantive effect of court’s orders and memorandum of decision
• article first, § 19, of state constitution consistently has been construed to mean that if there was right to trial by jury at time of adoption of provision, then that right remains intact
• article first, § 19, of state constitution consistently has been construed to mean that if there was right to trial by jury at time of adoption of provision, then that right remains intact

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).