Mays v. C. Mac Chambers Co., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding plaintiffs were not entitled to new trial where plaintiffs were aware of witness prior to trial but did not attempt to contact witness until after trial
• finding defense counsel’s questions concerning plaintiffs prior claims against other persons or companies were improper but not prejudicial
• finding the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion for new trial despite multiple in-limine violations
• finding defense counsel’s questions concerning plaintiff’s prior claims against other persons or companies were improper but not prejudicial
• motion for new trial based on Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 244(b), attorney misconduct

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).