Jackson v. Van Winkle

How courts have described this case

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

• providing that it is movant’s burden to show that evidence claimed to be newly discovered is not merely cumulative of trial evidence
• finding a lack of due diligence where “[t]here is no showing that Mr. Ramos or anyone from his office even attempted to search the Board records”
• trial court's refusal to grant motion for new trial will not be disturbed unless it amounted to an abuse of discretion
• court explained that failure to explain why lawyer did not earlier obtain evidence, which was available and existed prior to trial, showed a lack of diligence for purposes of motion for new trial
• listing the elements of a claim of newly discovered evidence
• listing the elements of a claim of newly discovered evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).