Legal Opinion
Patricia Hennessy v. Penril Datacomm Networks, Incorporated and Richard Burns
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided November 13, 1995No. 94-3475, 94-3565 and 94-3868PublishedCited by 203 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge.
A hotly contested trial, especially one raising explosive issues like claims of discrimination, often produces significant factual evidence capable of being interpreted in more than one way. Patricia Hennessy’s suit against Penril Datacomm Networks, Inc. was such a case. A jury heard the ease for ten days in 1994. Penril, which generally lost the battle below, is now here looking for relief from the judgment.
Appellate courts, viewing the sort of claims Penril is now making, must be mindful of their limited role in reviewing factual determinations made by juries…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. AikensSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Kramer v. Time Warner Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1991
- Kimberly Hern Troupe v. The May Department Stores Company, Doing Business as Lord & TaylorCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by203 opinions
- General Electric Capital Corporation v. Lease Resolution CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1997
- Edward Tobey v. Brenda ChibucosCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2018
- Daniel v. Cook CountyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2016
- Patricia M. Pivirotto v. Innovative Systems, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999
- Gerritsen v. Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2015
198 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.