Legal Opinion
Hirst v. Inverness Hotel Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided September 19, 2008No. 07-1277PublishedCited by 43 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
(September 19, 2008)
RENDELL, Circuit Judge.
Appellants Janet and David Hirst (“the Hirsts”) appeal the final judgment of the District Court in favor of Appellee Ranger American of V.I. (“Ranger”) following a jury trial and verdict. The Hirsts contend that the District Court committed legal error at trial by allowing Ranger’s president to give improper lay opinion testimony concerning the issue of proximate causation in violation of Federal Rule of Evidence 701. We agree. For the reasons stated below, we will vacate the District Court’s entry of judgment and remand for a new…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Marra v. Philadelphia Housing AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007
- Francis J. McQueeney v. Wilmington Trust Company, Trustee, and Anndep Steamship CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
- Government of the Virgin Islands v. Henry D. KnightCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- William P. Becker v. Arco Chemical Company, in No. 98-1636 William P. Becker v. Arco Chemical Company, William P. Becker, in No. 98-1888Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
- Arthur Doty v. Richard Sewall, Arthur Doty v. Richard SewallCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1990
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- Margaret Tourtellotte v. Eli Lilly & CoCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2016
- Donlin v. Philips Lighting North America Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2009
- James River Ins. Co. v. Rapid Funding, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2011
- Avaya Inc. v. Telecom Labs, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2016
- Joseph Egan v. Delaware River Port AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2017
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.