Viera Torres, Migdalia v. Oficina De Servicios Legislativoss

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that defendants conspired together to raise tank car gasoline prices in violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.
• recognizing that appeals to class prejudice may “so poison the minds of jurors ... that an accused may be deprived of a fair trial”
• holding that a party waived any argument over improper closing statements when counsel failed to object
• holding that a party waived any argument over improper closing statements when counsel failed to object
• holding that a price fixing agreement is one with “the purpose and . . . the effect of raising, depressing, fixing, pegging, or stabilizing the price” of a good or service
• noting that an erroneous jury instruction was more favorable to the defendants than they could have required

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).