Panix Productions, Ltd. v. Lewis
This text of 106 F. App'x 757 (Panix Productions, Ltd. v. Lewis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
SUMMARY ORDER
Appellants challenge the order of the District Court denying their motion for a new trial. On appeal, Appellants argue that the District Court abused its discretion in denying their motion for a new trial on the bases that (1) an ex parte freeze order obtained against Appellants by Ap-pellee Lewis’s counsel denied them then-right to a fair trial by (a) restricting funds necessary to litigation of this matter, and (b) hindering pre-trial witness preparation; (2) witness interference on the part of Appellee Main Events’ counsel denied them their right to a fair trial; and (3) the jury returned inconsistent verdicts.
We have considered Appellants’ arguments and hold that they are all without [758]*758merit. Accordingly, the order of the District Court is hereby AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
106 F. App'x 757, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/panix-productions-ltd-v-lewis-ca2-2004.