Michael Chess v. J. Dovey

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that an erroneous jury instruction is harmless if “it is more probable than not that the jury would have reached the same verdict had it been properly instructed” (citation omitted)
• applying pointless formality test when appellant proceeded pro se and the district court was aware of potential objections
• reviewing jury instructions de novo because, even though the instructions were not formally objected to by plaintiff, the district court had expressed misgivings about them before they were presented to the jury
• reviewing jury instructions de novo because, even though the instructions were not formally objected to by plaintiff, the district court had expressed misgivings about them before they were presented to the jury
• “[Sjecurity considerations are usually not present in medical care cases”
• describing the “pointless formality” exception to the objection requirement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).