Scott Birchler and Sandy Birchler v. Gehl Company

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an appellant’s failure to comply with Rule 10(b) did not preclude the court from a meaningful review of the merits of the appeal
• explaining that, when faced with opposing interpretations of unsettled state law, federal courts “generally choose the narrower interpretation which restricts liability, rather than the more expansive interpretation which creates substantially more liability”
• favoring narrow interpretation of undecided issues of liability under state law
• Plaintiffs “desirous of succeeding on novel state law claims” must “present those claims initially in state court.”
• “We avoid speculation about trends in diversity cases . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).