Whittenburg v. Werner Enterprises Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• citing, among other things, Model Rules of Prof. Conduct R. 3.4
• remanding for new trial on the basis of improper closing argument
• \That counsel's closing remarks were improper is one thing; that they rise to the high level required to merit reversal under our case law is quite another.\
• “[C]ounsel must confine comments to evidence in the record and reasonable inferences from that evidence.”
• “In this light, our job is not to grade closing arguments, but it is to police the outer boundaries of permissible argument.”
• “To imply or argue that the mere act of defending oneself, or the mere act of bringing suit, is reprehensible serves no proper purpose….”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).