Overstock.Com., Inc. v. N.Y. State Dep't of Taxation & Fin.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a supervisor’s statement attributed to the company’s district general manager fell within Rule 801(d)(2)(D)
• holding that “declaration and 22 deposition testimony, albeit uncorroborated and self-serving, were sufficient to establish a genuine dispute of material fact”
• holding that the plaintiff’s “uncorroborated 19 and self-serving” testimony was sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact
• holding that a “self-serving declaration that 21 states only conclusions and not facts that would be admissible evidence” is insufficient to create 22 a genuine factual dispute
• holding that an employee’s self-serving declaration and deposition testimony established a prima facie case of unlawful discrimination and created a genuine dispute of material fact whether the employer’s reason for firing the employee was pretextual
• holding that “a self-serving declaration does not always create a genuine issue of material fact for summary judgment: The district court can disregard a self-serving declaration that states only conclusions and not facts that would be admissible evidence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).