Lipphardt v. Durango Steakhouse of Brandon, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that a district court may “not second-guess the jury or substitute” its judgment for that of the jury if the jury’s “verdict is supported by [legally] sufficient evidence” (quotation omitted)
• in turn quoting Watts v. Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., 842 F.2d 307, 309-10 (11th Cir. 1988) (per curiam)
• “It is the function of the jury as the traditional finder of the facts, and not the Court, to weigh conflicting evidence and inferences.” (alteration adopted) (internal quotation marks omit- ted)
• “It is the function of the jury as the traditional finder of the facts, and not the Court, to weigh conflicting evidence and inferences, and determine the credibility of witnesses.” (brackets omitted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).