Hunter v. Sorensen

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming $0 pain-and-suffering verdict because \jury could have reasonably concluded that plaintiff suffered only a bruise to his knee as a result of the accident\
• affirming $0 pain-and-suffering verdict because “jury could have reasonably concluded that plaintiff suffered only a bruise to his knee as a result of the accident”
• “The evidence on the cause, nature, and extent of plaintiff’s injury was conflicting . . . . [and] [t]he jury could reasonably have concluded that plaintiff experienced no pain and suffering, or if he did, that it was de minimis.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).