John Giza v. Bnsf Railway Company

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 abuses its discretion by basing its ruling on unreasonable or untenable grounds
• noting that such “statistics give a norm as a frame of reference and allow the plaintiff to argue to the jury why he or she would deviate from that norm” and concluding that the court erred by excluding such evidence
• noting a district court’s evidentiary ruling may be upheld on an alternative ground
• noting the “concept was adequately conveyed by the instructions taken as a whole”
• “[E]vidence as to when railroad employees with thirty years of service typically retire [is admissible] so long as the evidence does not directly or indirectly refer to retirement benefits.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).