Rodriguez v. Senor Frog's de la Isla, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that because the \[p]art[y] pursuing appellate review\ did not provide a transcript we need to perform our appellate function, that party could not \prevail on [an] issue\ it sought to press
• finding a particular ruling in limine was \final enough\ to render additional objections at trial unnecessary
• finding appellant could not prevail on claim that trial judge gave erroneous jury instructions because it failed to meet the “basic requirement” of providing a transcript of the instructions
• even though they “are not part of the primary calculus,” post-suit happenings “may bear on the sincerity of a professed intention to remain”
• “[T]he best-evidence rule requires a party trying to prove the ‘content’ of a written document to introduce the document itself.”
• \Parties pursuing appellate review must supply us with enough raw material so that we can do our job.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).