James Dawson v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the Court must view the evidence in the “light most favorable to the jury’s verdict”
• stating that “[w]here the jury could have reached a number of different conclusions, all of which would have sufficient support based on the evidence, the jury’s findings will be upheld”
• explaining that “[w]here the jury could have reached a number of different conclusions, all of which would have sufficient support based on the evidence, the jury’s findings will be upheld.”
• instructing appellate courts to affirm a jury’s verdict unless the evidence points overwhelmingly the other way
• collecting cases for the proposition that, “[w]hen the basis for challenge to a juror is timely shown, the failure to object constitutes a [forfeiture] of the right to attack the composition of the jury”
• \section 1867 precludes any statutory challenges to irregularities in jury 5 selection that are not made before voir dire\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).