Quality Prefabrication, Inc. v. Daniel J. Keating Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that there must be some “articulation of the basis for the [district court’s] action . . . [to] enable the reviewing court to determine whether the relevant factors were considered and assigned appropriate weight in making the decision”
• “A timely appeal from an order denying a Rule 59 motion to alter or amend brings up the underlying judgment for review.”
• “Appellees’ motion for sanctions and appellant’s motion for reconsideration both invoke the discretion of the district court…and we will not reverse unless that court has abused its discretion.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).