§Why CasetextPricing

BURNETT v. OCEAN PROPERTIES LTD et al

REPLY to Response to Motion re MOTION for New Trial

16 Cited authorities

  1. A. G. Stevedores v. Ellerman Lines

    369 U.S. 355 (1962)   Cited 513 times
    Holding that while appellate courts should not redetermine facts found by a jury, it is their duty to view a jury's findings in a consistent manner

  2. Arculeo v. On-Site Sales & Mktg., LLC

    425 F.3d 193 (2d Cir. 2005)   Cited 269 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding no integrated employment for the purposes of Title VII

  3. Romano v. U-Haul Intern

    233 F.3d 655 (1st Cir. 2000)   Cited 168 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the defendant employer is responsible for proving that it made good faith efforts to comply with the requirements of Title VII, and that the mere existence of an antidiscrimination policy was insufficient absent proof that the employer actually implemented the policy

  4. Ahern v. Scholz

    85 F.3d 774 (1st Cir. 1996)   Cited 144 times
    Holding that "even if the district court abused its discretion in denying appellant's motion for a continuance, "the error was harmless"

  5. Auwood v. Harry Brandt Booking Office, Inc.

    850 F.2d 884 (2d Cir. 1988)   Cited 91 times
    Upholding denial

  6. Engelhardt v. S.P. Richards Co. Inc.

    472 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2003)   Cited 54 times
    Finding no evidence of centralized control of labor relations in wrongful termination claim under the Family and Medical Leave Act where one entity "made its own, independent decisions with respect to labor relations" and did not defer to the other entity "in making hiring, firing, assignment, scheduling, or compensation decisions"

  7. Toucet v. Maritime Overseas Corp.

    991 F.2d 5 (1st Cir. 1993)   Cited 51 times
    Finding that sufficient evidence was introduced to support the jury's determination that a seaman's employer was negligent in requiring him to continue working despite his claims of exhaustion and inadequate assistance, and that this negligence contributed to the seaman's back injury

  8. Colon-Millin v. Sears Roebuck De P.R., Inc.

    455 F.3d 30 (1st Cir. 2006)   Cited 30 times
    Denying motion when party waited until after trial to bring up issue of nondisclosure

  9. Merchant v. Ruhle

    740 F.2d 86 (1st Cir. 1984)   Cited 59 times
    Upholding inconsistent civil jury verdicts and finding it significant that the defendant had agreed to instructions allowing the jury to find liability on either of two claims

  10. McIsaac v. Didriksen Fishing Corp.

    809 F.2d 129 (1st Cir. 1987)   Cited 49 times
    Holding that because the defendant manufacturer did not caution the commercial marine market against using its product, it was responsible for anticipating reasonably foreseeable risks associated with use in that setting

  11. Rule 50 - Judgment as a Matter of Law in a Jury Trial; Related Motion for a New Trial; Conditional Ruling

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 50   Cited 13,575 times   62 Legal Analyses
    Allowing "renewed motion"

  12. Section 1981a - Damages in cases of intentional discrimination in employment

    42 U.S.C. § 1981a   Cited 4,152 times   55 Legal Analyses
    Finding that "additional remedies under Federal law are needed to deter unlawful harassment and intentional discrimination in the workplace"