Nathan L. Huey v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that proof that “the handling of [the plaintiff’s] situation departed from the 38 [defendant’s] norm” might imply a prohibited motivation
• upholding then-Civil Local Rule 6.05, which required the submission of specific evidentiary materials to dispute particular facts at summary judgment
• upholding then-Civil Local Rule 6.05, which required the submission of specific evidentiary materials to dispute particular facts at summary judgment
• “[J]udges need not paw over the 11 files without assistance from the parties.”
• “Expertise is a necessary but not a sufficient condition of admissibility under Rule 702. [The opinion witness] may have specialized knowledge or skills, but he did not apply them to the analysis of [this] claim.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).