Jerrold S. Pressman v. Franklin National Bank and Gordon E. Inman

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court should be reversed for abusing its discretion \only if we are firmly convinced of a mistake that affects substantial rights\ (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)
• holding that the district court should be reversed for abusing its discretion “only if we are firmly convinced of a mistake that affects substantial rights” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)
• holding that the district court should be reversed for abusing its discretion “only if we are firmly convinced of a mistake that affects substantial rights” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)
• reviewing Kress expert report on “feasible technologies . . . that could have been used to reasonably address hazards associated with potential vehicle malfunctions that can cause [sudden unintended acceleration] incidents”
• affirming the district court’s judgment for defendants where “th[e] evidence does not establish that either [defendant] intended to defraud the partnership—or even that the [defendants] knew that [the alleged co-conspirator] intended to defraud the partnership”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).