Palamara v. Chinnock Marine, 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, without that information, the court on appeal - 14 - couldn't determine whether the co-defendants were relevant comparators
• observing that two co-defendants were sentenced by a different judge, \a fact that makes [their] sentence[s] . . . less relevant\ to a disparity claim (alterations in original) (quoting United States v. Wallace, 573 F.3d 82, 97 (1st Cir. 2009))
• noting a disparity claim failed, in part, when appellant failed to provide relevant information to determine whether co-defendants were relevant comparators
• first quoting United States v. González-Barbosa, 920 F.3d 125, 131 (1st Cir. 2019); and then quoting United States v. Romero, 906 F.3d 196, 211 (1st Cir. 2018)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).