General Motors Corporation v. Burry

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that expert “sufficiently explained the basis for his testimony” and that there was more than a scintilla of evidence of a safer alternative design
• holding that expert \sufficiently explained the basis for his testimony\ and that there was more than a scintilla of evidence of a safer alternative design
• holding that expert sufficiently explained how the proposed alternative safer design would function
• holding that expert sufficiently explained how the proposed alternative safer design would function
• stating that one formulation of the factual sufficiency review is whether “the record clearly indicates that the award was based on passion, prejudice, or improper motive”
• affirming award for past and future pain and mental anguish of $5 million and $10 million, respectively

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).