Mathis v. Exxon Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• holding state law controls award and reasonableness of fee where, as here, it “supplies the rule of decision”
• discussing Uniform Commercial Code duty to act in good faith when fixing open price terms
• affirming the district court’s finding that the expert testimony of an economist had to be admitted because it made the party’s arguments more plausible
• applying Texas law; holding that there is both a B. Propriety of an Open Price Term under Ohio Law subjective test (“honesty in fact”) and an objective test (“reasonable commercial standards”
• \State law controls both the award of and the reasonableness of fees awarded where state law supplies the rule of decision.\
• a pretrial objection was sufficient to preserve error of proposed expert testimony for appellate review

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).