John R. Henry, Jr. v. Amalie Sneiders, and Amalie Sneiders, as Personal Representative of the Estateof Maksis Sneiders, Deceased, Defedant-Appellant

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that exclusion of the defendant’s evidence was proper because it went to liability rather than damages
• holding that the Seventh Amendment right to trial by jury trial does not survive a default judgement
• concluding that exclusion of the defendant’s evidence was proper because it went to liability rather than damages
• holding that a default judgment of $235,338.89 was permissible under Rule 54(c) where the complaint had alleged that the plaintiff had suffered $71,243.68 in direct losses, “together with additional amounts not yet fully determined”
• noting that a plaintiff need not specify an exact amount in his complaint in order to comply with Rule 22 54(c)’s requirement and prevail on a motion for default judgment
• \absence of a written order does not preclude the entry\ of sanctions where oral order was made and gave litigant notice

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).