Phinney v. Perlmutter

How courts have described this case

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

• reasoning that award of consequential damages was supported by requirement of culpable intent
• allowing a senior research associate at a university research institute to sue the institute’s director under the WPA
• discussing the required elements of a prima facie case under the WPA
• applying Phillips to a fraud claim and holding that mental distress damages are recoverable in fraud cases whenever such damages are the legal and natural consequences of the wrongful act and might reasonably have been anticipated
• stipulation to jury verdict form waived argument because “[e]rror requiring reversal cannot be error to which the aggrieved party contributed by plan or negligence”
• stipulation to jury verdict form waived argument because \[e]rror requiring reversal cannot be error to which the aggrieved party contributed by plan or negligence\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).