Forsyth v. Rowell

How courts have described this case

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

• holding defendant was not required to “object to the submission of more than one acceptable measure of his damages” or “request a limiting instruction” as a prerequisite to application of the one- satisfaction rule
• “Ortiz then would be not entitled to summary judgment based on the 13 common law because there was no consideration for the release.”
• “Although Ortiz characterized the Letter Agreements as express waivers for which no consideration was required, the parties were already in litigation with one another; thus, Ortiz was asking the trial court, in effect, to treat the Letter Agreements as releases.”
• stating rendition is appropriate when submitted jury question is immaterial
• Ortiz’s summary-judgment grounds included express waiver requiring no consideration

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).