Langman Fabrics v. Graff Californiawear

How courts have described this case

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

• declining to disregard testimony that was “far more detailed” than the initial testimony because the additional details were “not inconsistent with [the] first, brief account”
• “We have indeed held that a party may not create an issue of fact precluding summary judgment by offering an affidavit that contradicts his earlier sworn testimony in the case.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).