Young v. Illinois Central Gulf Railroad Company

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that evidence of earlier accidents offered for the “sole purpose” of establishing notice of an “arguably dangerous” condition
• motion picture experiment was ad missible to show physical possibility of decedent’s car being diverted onto railroad track
• testimony from lay witnesses concerning their impression of condition of railroad crossing improperly excluded
• “[i]t must be remembered that ‘(t)he federal rules and practice favor the admission of evidence rather than its exclusion if it has any probative value at all.” (quoting United States v. Carranco, 551 F.2d 1197 (10th Cir. 1977)
• “Trial courts must not lose sight, however, of the liberal nature of the Federal Rules of Evidence. It must be remembered that the federal rules and practice favor the admission of evidence rather than its exclusion if it has any probative value at all.”
• “Trial courts must not lose sight, however, of the liberal nature of the Federal Rules of Evidence. It must be remembered that the federal rules and practice favor the admission of evidence rather than its exclusion if it has any probative value at all.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).