Roger L. Harris, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “reviewing court must adopt a view of the case, if there is one, that resolves any seeming inconsistency” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• noting that temporal proximity can establish a causal connection between a protected activity and an adverse employment action
• noting that vacation of judgment is only necessary where the jury's findings cannot be harmonized
• instructing courts faced “with seemingly inconsistent verdicts” that they “must adopt a view of the case, if there is one, that resolves any seeming inconsistency”
• courts faced \with seemingly inconsistent verdicts” \must adopt a view of the case, if there is one, that resolves any seeming inconsistency”
• courts faced “with seemingly inconsistent verdicts” “must adopt a view of the case, if there is one, that resolves any séeming inconsistency”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).