United States v. Steven Fenzl

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that lay wit- nesses must tether any inferences to their own perception and the “reasoning process … of an average person in everyday life” not to any specialized training or experience
• explaining that under the mail and wire fraud statutes, “a decision made after the contract was signed” to break a promise contained therein would not support a fraud claim, but “an intention formed during the bidding process” would
• explaining that bid rigging is a form of horizontal price fix- ing
• describing bid rigging as “a form of price fixing in which bidders agree to eliminate competition among them, as by taking turns being the low bidder”
• defining “bid rigging” as “a form of price fixing in which bidders agree to eliminate competition among them, as by taking turns being the low bidder”
• “a lay witness is permitted to base his testimony on his personal knowledge (and on nothing else)”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).