Vialpando v. Johanns

How courts have described this case

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

• upholding jury verdict where employer’s reduction of bonus from $5,000 to $2,000 could deter a “could deter a reasonable employee from invoking Title VII”
• reducing lodestar by 70% where plaintiff prevailed on only one claim out of twelve claims asserted and jury awarded only 5% of requested damages
• “Using the guise of refreshing recollection to admit the contents of a document as substantive evidence . . . is improper, as it implicates the concerns underlying the hearsay rule.”
• rejecting plaintiff’s requests for cost of deposit ion transcripts because she hadn’t “shown that these witnesses had [relev ant] testimony” and because a party can’t “recover expenses inc urred on [unsuccessful] claims”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).