Skip to main content
· 2/1/1988

William E. Wilson v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation

Citations

  • 838 F.2d 286
  • 10 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 100
  • 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 1114
  • 45 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 37,735
  • 45 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1643
  • 1988 WL 5633

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that post- complaint facts alleged in a supplemental pleading may cure jurisdictional defects
  • concluding that the plaintiff's amended complaint cured ripeness defect in original complaint
  • “[A] district court may grant summary judgment where a party’s sudden and unexplained revision of testimony creates an issue of fact where none existed before.”
  • “(a) party should not be allowed to create issues of credibility by contradicting his own earlier testimony.”
  • “Ambiguities and even conflicts in a deponent’s testimony are generally matters for the jury to sort out, but a district court may grant summary judgment where a party’s sudden and unexplained revision of testimony creates an issue of fact where none existed before.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lay, Henley, Arnold

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.