Marathon Corp. v. Pitzner

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that evidence of proximate causation was legally insufficient because circumstances could give rise to any number of inferences, none more probable than another
• noting that “suspicion linked to other suspicion produces only more suspicion,” and that “an inference stacked only on other inferences is not legally sufficient evidence”
• holding “[m]ere proof that Ernestina Moreno was injured in LMB’s parking lot is not proof of such proximate cause”
• observing that “some suspicion linked to other suspicion produces only more suspicion, which is not the same as some evidence” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• explaining that “an inference stacked only on other inferences is not legally sufficient evidence”
• stating that “an inference stacked only on other inferences is not legally sufficient evidence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).