Smith v. Ingersoll-Rand, 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 the district court did not err in admitting testimony by Stan Smith even though it did not perform a Daubert analysis
• noting that testimony quantifying hedonic damages is inadmissible
• “The defendant must act knowingly, displaying an ‘evil motive’ or culpable mental state.”
• “The defendant must act knowingly, displaying an ‘evil motive’ or culpable mental state.”
• inventorying additional cases where Smith's testimony was excluded

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).