Legal Opinion
Topliff v. Gross
District Court, D. Kansas
Decided January 14, 1998No. Civil Action 94-1415-MLBPublished
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
BELOT, District Judge.
Before the court are the following:
1. Plaintiffs’ motion for new trial (Docs. 188 and 189); and
2. Defendant’s response in opposition (Doc. 190).
This is a medical malpractice case. The trial began on December 1, 1997. Plaintiffs called ten witnesses; defendant called seven. The jury began its deliberations at approximately noon on December 10 and returned its verdict for defendant at approximately noon on December 11, 1997. Plaintiffs now contend that they are entitled to a new trial based upon comments made by the court. For the following reasons,…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- McDonough Power Equipment, Inc. v. GreenwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Rasmussen Drilling, Inc., a Colorado Corporation Licensed to Do Business in Wyoming v. Kerr-Mcgee Nuclear Corporation and Kerr-Mcgee CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1978
- Anderson v. Phillips Petroleum Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1988
- Patrick Vasey v. Martin Marietta Corporation, a Maryland CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1994
- Sharon Kay Holmes v. James Walter WackCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1972
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.