Steven TATE, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. ROBBINS & MYERS, INC., Defendant, Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• upholding the exclusion of evidence where the appellant’s argument for admissibility had not been presented to the court below
• “A party may not claim error on appeal in the exclusion of evidence unless the district court was told not only what the party intended to prove but also for what purpose.” Citing 1 Weinstein Evidence, § 103[03], at 103-33 (1985 ed.) and McCormick, Evidence § 51, at 112 (1972)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).