Legal Opinion

Giron v. McFadden

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided October 15, 2010No. Civil Action 07-0425 DARPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

DEBORAH A. ROBINSON, United States Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiffs Motion for New Trial “pursuant to Rule 59” of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Document No. 50) is pending for determination by the undersigned. Plaintiff, through his counsel, advances but two grounds for the relief which he seeks. First, Plaintiff maintains that “[t]he jury’s verdict ... was a seriously erroneous result given the undisputed evidence that the subject accident ... caused at least some injury and damages!,]” (Plaintiffs Motion for New Trial at 5) and that “[t]he only plausible…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Nyman v. Chairman, Federal Deposit InsuranceDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1997
  2. Loni Czekalski v. Raymond LaHoodCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2009
  3. In Re Lorazepam & Clorazepate Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2006
  4. Martinez v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2007
  5. Medina v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Giron v. McFaddenCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2011
  2. Poorsina v. Bank of America, N. A.District Court, N.D. California · 2024

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API