Featured Firms
Presented by BigVoodoo
The appellant contends that the trial court erred in refusing to submit "a jury question regarding UPS's right of control," admitting hearsay testimony and denying appellant the opportunity to voir dire a witness or to make an offer of proof, denying appellant's motion for a mistrial, admitting expert opinion testimony that was based on a "false assumption," and denying his motion for a new trial. The court affirms.
November 22, 2004 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
Presented by BigVoodoo
Join General Counsel and Senior Legal Leaders at the Premier Forum Designed For and by General Counsel from Fortune 1000 Companies
The Texas Lawyer honors attorneys and judges who have made a remarkable difference in the legal profession in Texas.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Truly exceptional Bergen County New Jersey Law Firm is growing and seeks strong plaintiff's personal injury Attorney with 5-7 years plaintif...
Epstein Becker & Green is seeking an associate to joins its Commercial Litigation practice in our Columbus or Cincinnati offices. Ca...
Job Opportunity: Location: Prestigious Florida Law Firm seeks to hire a Business attorney with at least 5 years of experience for their Ft. ...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS