United States v. William D. Sassanelli

How courts have described this case

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

• Under this standard, we take a “maximal view” of the evidence’s probative effect and a “minimal view of its unfairly prejudicial effect.”
• because there was \no serious argument\ that denial by defendant of any involvement in false invoice scheme at issue could not have influenced court presiding over civil action against defendant, defendant failed to satisfy fourth prong of Rule 52(b) test
• because there was “no serious argument” that denial by defendant of any involvement in false invoice scheme at issue could not have influenced court presiding over civil action against defendant, defendant-failed to satisfy fourth prong of Rule 52(b) test

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).