Nissenbaum v. NNH Cal Neva Services Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “ ‘[a] decision with only a simple concurrence should not be considered a plurality decision’ ” (quoting Ken Kimura, Note, A Legitimacy Model for the Interpretation of Plurality Decisions, 77 Cornell L. Rev. 1593,1595 n.13 (1992))
• explaining that '\[a] decision with only a simple concurrence should not be considered a plurality decision'\ (quoting Ken Kimura, Note, A Legitimacy Model for the Interpretation of Plurality Decisions, 77 CORNELL L. REv. 1593, 1595 n.13 (1992))
• ordering pretrial production of evidence where it was clear that the evidence would be useful for impeachment and it was \known with certainty\ that the witness would testify

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).