Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc.
530 U.S. 133 (2000) Cited 21,063 times 22 Legal AnalysesHolding that, since the 58-year-old plaintiff was fired by his 60-year-old employer, there was an inference that "age discrimination was not the motive"
Peacock v. Thomas
516 U.S. 349 (1996) Cited 754 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding that the Court lacked ancillary jurisdiction to hear claims brought after underlying suit was resolved and where allegations in subsequent suit, which sought to pierce the corporate veil, had "little or no factual interdependence" with underlying question of whether corporate officers had breached their fiduciary duty
Escriba v. Foster Poultry Farms, Inc.
743 F.3d 1236 (9th Cir. 2014) Cited 288 times 13 Legal AnalysesHolding an employee may affirmatively decline to use FMLA leave, even if the employee's reason for seeking leave would invoke FMLA protection
Landes Const. Co., v. Royal Bank of Canada
833 F.2d 1365 (9th Cir. 1987) Cited 415 timesHolding new trial should be granted where court "is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed"
In re Toyota Motor Corp. Unintended Acceleration Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation
754 F. Supp. 2d 1145 (C.D. Cal. 2010) Cited 193 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding that one or more named plaintiffs may satisfy the notice requirements of section1782 on behalf of the entire putative class
Milgard Tempering, Inc. v. Selas Corp. of America
902 F.2d 703 (9th Cir. 1990) Cited 285 timesHolding § 455 did not require recusal of a district judge whose law clerk received a job offer from the plaintiff's law firm while the case was pending because the judge screened the law clerk from the case immediately after the firm contacted the clerk
McCabe v. American Honda Motor Co.
100 Cal.App.4th 1111 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002) Cited 114 times 2 Legal AnalysesDiscussing products liability defects
U.S. v. Warren
25 F.3d 890 (9th Cir. 1994) Cited 106 timesHolding that "[o]ffenses committed in a single criminal episode do not become inadmissible because the defendant is being tried for only some of his acts"
Strong v. Laubach
443 F.3d 1297 (10th Cir. 2006) Cited 57 timesNo. 05-6207. April 11, 2006. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma. Jon W. Laasch, Jacobson Laasch, Edmond, OK, for Defendant-Appellee. Before KELLY, BRISCOE, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges. KELLY, Circuit Judge. William and Carolyn Strong appeal from a district court order requiring them to return exempt workers' compensation funds that they had collected through garnishment proceedings related to a judgment entered in their favor against Donald Laubach. We
Falk v. Keene Corp.
113 Wn. 2d 645 (Wash. 1989) Cited 86 timesHolding that an issue concerning an instruction that was not challenged at trial was properly before the court where the party had made his position clear through his objection to the trial court's failure to give one of his proposed instructions
Rule 59 - New Trial; Altering or Amending a Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 59 Cited 43,294 times 65 Legal AnalysesAllowing a party to move to alter or amend a judgment "no later than 28 days after the entry of the judgment"
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 13,584 times 62 Legal AnalysesAllowing "renewed motion"