Ivey v. Cochran

How courts have described this case

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

• framing the inquiry in terms of \whether a reasonable person in the employee's position would have felt compelled to resign.\
• finding that the trial court did not err in denying prejudgment interest because “prejudgment interest would have been duplicative because the jury’s damage award primarily consisted of damages for lost future earnings and not for lost past earnings”
• detailing evidence such as an offer of employment, salary letters, monthly statements from the clinic, a schedule of new operations, etc.
• “While an expert’s opinion need not be based on absolute certainty, an opinion based on mere possibilities is not competent evidence.”
• “[E]xpert testimony cannot be based solely upon conjecture or surmise.”
• \[E]xpert testimony cannot be based solely upon conjecture or surmise.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).