Wurtzel v. Starbucks Coffee Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[i]f the circumstantial evidence presented lends itself equally to several conflicting inferences, the trier of fact is not permitted to select the inference it prefers, since to do so would be the equivalent of engaging in pure speculation about the facts”
• stating that a party may not rely on “ ‘mere speculation or conjecture as to the true nature of the facts to overcome a motion for summary judgment’ ”. (quoting Knight v. U.S. Fire Ins. Co., 804 F.2d 9, 12 (2d Cir. 1986))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).