27 Cited authorities

Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio
475 U.S. 574 (1986) Cited 113,508 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them
Williamson v. United States
512 U.S. 594 (1994) Cited 859 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that Rule 804(b) "does not allow admission of non-self-inculpatory statements, even if they are made within a broader narrative that is generally self-inculpatory"
United Tech. Corp. v. Mazer
556 F.3d 1260 (11th Cir. 2009) Cited 883 times
Holding that " court without personal jurisdiction is powerless to take further action"
In re Japanese Electronic Products
723 F.2d 238 (3d Cir. 1983) Cited 588 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that meeting minutes were prima facie authenticated because they had "the appearance, content and substance typical of minutes" and "[t]hey were produced by the defendants"
In re Baby Food Antitrust Litigation
166 F.3d 112 (3d Cir. 1999) Cited 221 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the district court properly discounted evidence about allegedly collusive communications where, among other things, the defendant receiving those communications "generally did not act on any information obtained through" them
U.S. v. Wright
363 F.3d 237 (3d Cir. 2004) Cited 53 times
Finding statement made in course of confidential relationship as a factor supporting trustworthiness under the residual hearsay exception
United States v. Bailey
581 F.2d 341 (3d Cir. 1978) Cited 115 times
Affirming admission of hearsay despite a lack of notice under 804(b) because the declarant became unavailable only after trial began, thus making it impossible for the proponent to give earlier notice
Brown ex Rel. Estate of Brown v. Philip Morris Inc.
228 F. Supp. 2d 506 (D.N.J. 2002) Cited 54 times
Holding that the plaintiff's fraud claims, which essentially recasted the plaintiff's product liability claims, fell within the ambit of the NJPLA
United States v. Awer
770 F.3d 83 (1st Cir. 2014) Cited 13 times
Holding that a prosecutor's comment during closing, which was "incorrect and improper, to be sure," "was just a slight misstatement of the evidence" that was "swiftly corrected by the court"
United States v. Ashburn
11-CR-303 (NGG) (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 31, 2015) Cited 8 times
Denying relief where jurors were presumed to be impartial since petitioner proffered no evidence that the jury failed to follow the court's instructions
Rule 403 - Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time, or Other Reasons
Fed. R. Evid. 403 Cited 22,678 times 81 Legal Analyses
Adopting a similar standard, but requiring the probative value to be "substantially outweighed" by these risks
Rule 703 - Bases of an Expert's Opinion Testimony
Fed. R. Evid. 703 Cited 4,751 times 26 Legal Analyses
Explaining that facts or data of a type upon which experts in the field would reasonably rely in forming an opinion need not be admissible in order for the expert's opinion based on the facts and data to be admitted
Rule 804 - Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay-When the Declarant Is Unavailable as a Witness
Fed. R. Evid. 804 Cited 3,972 times 32 Legal Analyses
Recognizing an exception to the hearsay exclusionary rule when the party against whom the statement is offered has engaged in wrongdoing which procures the unavailability of the declarant
Rule 103 - Rulings on Evidence
Fed. R. Evid. 103 Cited 3,441 times 18 Legal Analyses
Holding that once a court makes a definitive ruling on the record to either admit or exclude evidence, at or before trial, a party need not renew an objection at trial to preserve any alleged error for appeal
Rule 805 - Hearsay Within Hearsay
Fed. R. Evid. 805 Cited 879 times 4 Legal Analyses
Allowing hearsay within hearsay only "if each part of the combined statements conforms with an exception to the rule"
Rule 102 - Purpose
Fed. R. Evid. 102 Cited 279 times 1 Legal Analyses
Instructing courts to construe the Rules "as to administer every proceeding fairly, eliminate unjustifiable expense and delay, and promote the development of evidence law, to the end of ascertaining the truth and securing a just determination."

CARPENTER CO. et al v. BASF SE et al

27 Cited authorities

Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them

Holding that Rule 804(b) "does not allow admission of non-self-inculpatory statements, even if they are made within a broader narrative that is generally self-inculpatory"

Holding that " court without personal jurisdiction is powerless to take further action"

Holding that meeting minutes were prima facie authenticated because they had "the appearance, content and substance typical of minutes" and "[t]hey were produced by the defendants"

Holding that the district court properly discounted evidence about allegedly collusive communications where, among other things, the defendant receiving those communications "generally did not act on any information obtained through" them

Finding statement made in course of confidential relationship as a factor supporting trustworthiness under the residual hearsay exception

Affirming admission of hearsay despite a lack of notice under 804(b) because the declarant became unavailable only after trial began, thus making it impossible for the proponent to give earlier notice

Holding that the plaintiff's fraud claims, which essentially recasted the plaintiff's product liability claims, fell within the ambit of the NJPLA

Holding that a prosecutor's comment during closing, which was "incorrect and improper, to be sure," "was just a slight misstatement of the evidence" that was "swiftly corrected by the court"

Denying relief where jurors were presumed to be impartial since petitioner proffered no evidence that the jury failed to follow the court's instructions

Adopting a similar standard, but requiring the probative value to be "substantially outweighed" by these risks

Explaining that facts or data of a type upon which experts in the field would reasonably rely in forming an opinion need not be admissible in order for the expert's opinion based on the facts and data to be admitted

Recognizing an exception to the hearsay exclusionary rule when the party against whom the statement is offered has engaged in wrongdoing which procures the unavailability of the declarant

Holding that once a court makes a definitive ruling on the record to either admit or exclude evidence, at or before trial, a party need not renew an objection at trial to preserve any alleged error for appeal

Allowing hearsay within hearsay only "if each part of the combined statements conforms with an exception to the rule"

Instructing courts to construe the Rules "as to administer every proceeding fairly, eliminate unjustifiable expense and delay, and promote the development of evidence law, to the end of ascertaining the truth and securing a just determination."