Sills v. Moorings Prop., LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the district court did not err in using dictionary definition to define “encourage” in § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) and including “to help” in the definition did not “render . . . superfluous” the other two subsections of § 1324
• explaining that a “reasonable probability [] that, but for the remarks, the outcome of the trial would have been different” is necessary for reversal
• explaining that “we will reverse only if the evidence is so prejudicial as to be incurable by that measure”
• noting that “statements and arguments of counsel are not evidence” (quoting United States v. Smith, 918 F.2d 1551, 1562 (11th Cir. 1990))
• stating that, where the district court takes proper curative measures, “we will reverse only if the evidence is so prejudicial as to be incurable by that measure.”
• explaining that, where the district court instructs the jury that counsel’s statements are not evidence, “we will reverse only if the [statement] is so prejudicial as to be incurable”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).