Jack Faucett Associates, Inc. v. American Telephone and Telegraph Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that the offensive collateral estoppel doctrine is “detailed, difficult, and potentially dangerous”
• refusing to apply collateral estoppel where evidence tending to require a different result was excluded in the first action by erroneous evidentiary rulings by the court
• “Moreover, we cannot conclude that this evidence, which arguably could shed some light on AT & T’s beliefs and intentions, could not lead to a different conclusion in a new trial on the other interrogatories submitted to the jury.”
• where nonmutual offensive collateral estoppel is requested, “‘fairness’ gains special importance”
• offensive collateral estoppel is “detailed, difficult, and potentially dangerous”
• applying offensive collateral estoppel can be “detailed” and “difficult”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).