Pacesetter Corp. v. Barrickman

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that evidence of employer’s handling of only two other workers’ compensation claims was not admissible as evidence of routine practice in employee’s suit against employer for wrongful discharge in retaliation for filing a workers’ compensation claim
• defendant's offer of two incidents insufficient to establish habit as to how company handled workers' compensation claims
• two incidents does not meet test of frequency and regularity to be admissible as habit evidence
• two incidents does not meet test of frequency and regularity to be admissible as habit evidence
• proof of only two other incidents of handling workers' compensation claims does not meet test of frequency and regularity
• defendant's offer of two incidents insufficient to establish habit as to how company handled workers' compensation claims

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).