Ryman v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that this court must “follow the decisions of the state’s intermediate appellate courts” absent “convincing evidence” the state supreme court would decide otherwise (citations omitted)
• holding that intermediate appellate court decisions generally are binding
• federal court must following decision of state’s intermediate appellate court unless federal court finds convincing evidence that state supreme court likely would not follow it
• panel is not required to follow intermediate state appellate authority where there is convincing evidence that the state supreme court would decide differently
• panel is not required to follow intermediate state appellate authority where there is convincing evidence that the state supreme court would decide differently
• where state intermediate appellate court has interpreted state statute, federal court follows relevant precedent, unless there is convincing evidence that the state's supreme court likely would not follow it.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).