Legal Opinion
Static Control Components, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Kentucky
Decided October 28, 2010No. 5:04-misc-00001PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
GREGORY F. VAN TATENHOVE, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Lexmark International, Inc.’s Motion for New Trial [R. 1458] pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59. Lexmark seeks a new trial on three grounds: (1) the jury’s verdict in Part I of the Special verdict form was against the weight of the evidence; (2) it was prejudiced before and during trial by various rulings of the Court; and (3) certain jury instructions were erroneous and prejudicial to Lexmark. [Id.] For the reasons set forth below, Lexmark’s motion will be denied.
I
The facts of…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Hertz Corp. v. FriendSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Zafiro v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Carol L. Kirchner GAFFORD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1993
- Lori David v. Caterpillar, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2003
- Manville Sales Corporation, Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Paramount Systems, Inc., Robert S. Butterworth and Anthony J. DisimoneCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Henderson v. Chesapeake Exploration L.L.C.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2019