Legal Opinion
Trepel v. Roadway Express, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided June 27, 2002No. 00-3880PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
COLE, Circuit Judge.
Dr. Martin Trepel asks us to review, for a second time, damages assessed against Roadway Express, Inc. (“Roadway”) for breaking his unique wooden snake carving. In Trepel v. Roadway Express, Inc., 194 F.3d 708 (6th Cir.1999) (Trepel 1 )1 we found that evidentiary errors warranted remand to the district court for a second trial on damages. Trepel now seeks a third trial, alleging that sundry procedural and evidentiary rulings tainted the result of his second trial. Roadway responds that none of Trepel’s allegations are meritorious, and that any errors that might have…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Gary McKnight Cross-Appellant v. General Motors Corporation, Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1990
- Dr. Martin TREPEL, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee, v. ROADWAY EXPRESS, INC. Defendant-Appellee/Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
- General Signal Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. MCI Telecommunications Corporation, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- Forrest A. Flaminio and Gloria Flaminio v. Honda Motor Company, Ltd., a Japanese CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
- United States v. Cheryl HumphreyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Maloney v. BrassfieldColorado Court of Appeals · 2010
- United States v. DimoraDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2012
- Trepel v. Roadway Express, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
- Abrams v. MendsenDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2003
- Dassault Systèmes, SA v. Keith ChildressCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2020
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.