Iman Sharif v. Nathan Picone

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that a plaintiff’s credibility was “crucial to his claim” where he was the only witness testifying on his behalf
• finding that a three-year-old conviction was not “so far remote in time as to be irrelevant”
• stating that plaintiff’s testimony was “crucial to his claim” and that his credibility “was paramount to his case” because he was the only person to testify on his behalf about the events that led to his lawsuit (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)
• noting particular concern with admission of a prior conviction “where the nature of the conviction is . . . closely related to the issue at trial”
• observing that Rule 410 encourages compromise in criminal cases
• discussing and applying these factors in an inmate’s Section 1983 civil rights action

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).