Unitherm Food Systems, Inc. v. Swifteckrich, Inc. Dba Conagra Refrigerated Foods

543 U.S. 1186, 161 L. Ed. 2d 189, 125 S. Ct. 1396, 73 U.S.L.W. 3513, 2005 U.S. LEXIS 2083, 2005 WL 443881
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided February 28, 2005·No. 04-597·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

C. A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari granted limited to the following question: “Whether, and to what extent, a court of appeals may review the sufficiency of evidence supporting a civil jury verdict where the party requesting review made a motion for judgment as a matter of law under Rule 50(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure before submission of the case to the jury, but neither renewed that motion under Rule 50(b) after the jury’s verdict, nor moved for a new trial under Rule 59?”

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Unitherm Food Systems, Inc. v. Swifteckrich, Inc. Dba Conagra Refrigerated Foods, 543 U.S. 1186, 161 L. Ed. 2d 189, 125 S. Ct. 1396, 73 U.S.L.W. 3513, 2005 U.S. LEXIS 2083, 2005 WL 443881 (2005).

543 U.S. 1186 (Unitherm Food Systems, Inc. v. Swifteckrich, Inc. Dba Conagra Refrigerated Foods) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Arthur W. Fuesting v. Zimmer, Inc.
448 F.3d 936 (Seventh Circuit, 2006)
Smith v. District of Columbia
413 F.3d 86 (D.C. Circuit, 2005)