Nitco Holding Corp. v. Zareh Boujikian James B. Murray

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that to preserve a sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge, a party must file both a pre-verdict motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a) and a post-verdict motion for judgment as a matter of law or new trial under Rule 50(b)
• holding that to preserve a sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge, a party must file both a pre-verdict motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a) and a post-verdict motion for judgment as a matter of law or new trial under Rule 50(b)
• highlighting that a Rule 50(b) motion preserves a challenge to the \sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict in a civil case[.]\
• holding that to preserve a sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge, a party must file both a pre-verdict motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a) and a post-verdict motion for judgment .as a matter of law or a new trial under Rule 60(b)
• holding that to preserve a sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge, a party must file both a pre- verdict motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a) and a post-verdict motion for judgment as a matter of law or new trial under Rule 50(b)
• explaining that plain error review is precluded when a party fails to file a Rule 50(b) motion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).