Excel Handbag Co., Inc., Etc., Cross-Appellee v. Edison Brothers Stores, Inc., Etc., Cross-Appellant

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that evidence did not establish commercial bribery because there was no \proof of inducement\
• holding that evidence did not establish commercial bribery because there was no “proof of inducement”
• “This Court uniformly has held . . . that the federal rather than the state test should be applied to determine if there is sufficient evidence to create a jury question because the issue is one of procedural rather than substantive law.”
• declining to reach the issue

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).