Sparling v. Peabody Coal Company

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that even “contradictory testimony of a witness does not per se destroy [his credibility], and it remains for the trier of fact to decide when, if at all, he testified truthfully”
• stating that even ‘contradictory testimony of a witness does not per se destroy [his credibility], and it remains for the trier of fact to decide when, if at all, he testified truthfully’
• stating that even “contradictory testimony of a witness does not per se destroy [his credibility] ***, and it remains for the trier of fact to decide when, if at all, he testified truthfully”
• stating that even “contradictory testimony of a witness does not per se destroy [his credibility], and it remains for the trier of fact to decide when, if at all, he testified truthfully”
• stating that even 'contradictory testimony of a witness does not per se destroy [his credibility], and it remains for the trier of fact to decide when, if at all, he testified truthfully'
• credibility of witness whose own testimony is contradictory is for the jury to decide

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).