Legal Opinion

Eshelman v. Auerbach

District Court, E.D. North Carolina

Decided March 11, 2022No. 7:16-cv-00018Unknown

1Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA SOUTHERN DIVISION No. 7:16-CV-18-D FREDRIC N. ESHELMAN, ) Plaintiff, v. : ) ORDER PUMA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC., Defendant. On March 18, 2019, a jury awarded plaintiff Fredric N. Eshelman (“Eshelman” or “plaintiff’) $22.35 million in compensatory and punitive damages against defendant Puma Biotechnology, Inc. (“Puma” or “defendant”) for defamation [D.E. 388, 389]. On May 10, 2019, the court granted Puma’s motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62(b) for a supersedeas bond to stay the judgment pending appeal [D.E.…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Poplar Grove Planting and Refining Co., Inc. v. Bache Halsey Stuart, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1979
  2. 48 Fair empl.prac.cas. 972, 48 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 38,527 Warren G. Herold v. Hajoca Corporation, Warren G. Herold v. Hajoca CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1989
  3. Republic Tobacco Company v. North Atlantic Trading Company, Inc., North Atlantic Operating Company, Inc., and National Tobacco CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007
  4. Morrison Knudsen Corp. v. Ground Improvement Techniques, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008
  5. Meriwether v. CoughlinDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1989

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API