John Pierce v. F.R. Tripler & Co. And Hartmarx Specialty Stores, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding evidence of a rejected settlement offer inadmissible to demonstrate a failure to mitigate, because such evidence is barred by plain language of FRE 408
• explaining that “the timing of the offer and the existence of a disputed claim” are indicia as to whether “an offer is made in compromising . . . a claim” (quotation omitted)
• relying on “plain language” of Rule 408 to find settlement offer inadmissible
• reversing sanctions under Federal Rule 11 and declining to consider whether sanctions could be upheld on an alternate basis because “the judge made no such finding here and the sanctions cannot be upheld on appeal on that ground”
• “Where a party presents no evidence to support a particular theory of his case, he has no right to a jury instruction on that point.”
• “Under Fed. R.Evid. 104(a), preliminary factual questions concerning the admissibility of evidence such as whether an offer was made in the course of settlement negotiations are to be determined by the court.’’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).