Schilling v. Schwitzer-Cummins Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining the Court is “not require[d] or encourage[d] . . . to assert the negative of each rejected contention as well as the affirmative of those which [it] find[s] to be correct”
• explaining the Court is “not require[d] or encourage[d] . . . to assert the negative of each rejected contention as well as the affirmative of those which [it] find[s] to be correct”
• “While counsel may be disappointed that findings do not discuss propositions sincerely contended for, that, alone, .does not make them inadequate or suggest that such propositions were not understood by the court.”
• The Court is “not require[d] or encourage[d] . . . to assert the negative of each rejected contention as well as the affirmative of those which [it] find[s] to be correct.”
• The Court is “not require[d] or encourage[d] . . . to assert the negative of each rejected contention as well as the affirmative of those which [it] find[s] to be correct.”
• “While counsel may be disappointed that findings do not discuss propositions sincerely contended for, that, alone, does not make them inadequate or suggest that such propositions were not understood by the court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).