United States v. Vito Lorusso and Joseph Errante

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that trial court’s decision to charge the jury on a lesser offense “was well within the court’s authority and was properly designed to ensure the just determination of the charges brought against these defendants”
• recognizing that a “district court has the inherent power to reconsider and modify its interlocutory orders prior to the entry or judgment” (citations omitted)
• stating that “[a] district court has the inherent power to reconsider and modify its interlocutory orders prior to the entry of judgment”
• addressing both civil and criminal cases and stating that \district court has the inherent power to reconsider and modify its interlocutory orders prior to the entry of judgment\
• “A district court has the inherent power to reconsider and modify its interlocutory orders prior to the entry of judgment.”
• “[W]hether the case sub judice be civil or criminal, so long as the district court has jurisdiction over the case, it possesses inherent power over interlocutory orders, and can reconsider them when it is consonant with justice to do so.” (cleaned up)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).