Koonce v. Oklahoma

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 trial abused its discretion in 22 barring evidence of subsequent remedial measure of non-party
• holding that FRE 407 11 did not exclude warning sign erected by nonparty after an accident
• explaining that an offer of proof proceeding should be reviewed according to the contours the trial court established for that proceeding
• stating that a party challenging exclusion of evidence “must have attempted to introduce the evidence [that] was improperly excluded to preserve the[ ] right to appeal”
• characterizing Kisor’s language as an “inadvertent misstatement”
• characterizing Kisor’s language as an “inadvertent misstate- ment”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).