Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor Corporation
Filed: June 9, 2017
Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 15-2507
Kelly, Author, with Loken and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Products Liability. In action involving unintended acceleration in Toyota Camrys, the district court carefully weighed the admission of other similar incident evidence and did not abuse its discretion in admitting a limited number of substantially similar incidents; argument that the district court erred in allowing plaintiffs' expert to give his opinion regarding the cause of the unintended acceleration rejected as this…
Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor Corporation
Filed: June 9, 2017
Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 15-2511
Kelly, Author, with Loken and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Products Liability. In action involving unintended acceleration in Toyota Camrys, the district court carefully weighed the admission of other similar incident evidence and did not abuse its discretion in admitting a limited number of substantially similar incidents; argument that the district court erred in allowing plaintiffs' expert to give his opinion regarding the cause of the unintended acceleration rejected as this…
Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor Corporation
Filed: June 9, 2017
Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 15-2636
Kelly, Author, with Loken and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Products Liability. In action involving unintended acceleration in Toyota Camrys, the district court carefully weighed the admission of other similar incident evidence and did not abuse its discretion in admitting a limited number of substantially similar incidents; argument that the district court erred in allowing plaintiffs' expert to give his opinion regarding the cause of the unintended acceleration rejected as this…
Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor Corporation
Filed: June 9, 2017
Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 15-2637
Kelly, Author, with Loken and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Products Liability. In action involving unintended acceleration in Toyota Camrys, the district court carefully weighed the admission of other similar incident evidence and did not abuse its discretion in admitting a limited number of substantially similar incidents; argument that the district court erred in allowing plaintiffs' expert to give his opinion regarding the cause of the unintended acceleration rejected as this…
Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor Corporation
Filed: June 9, 2017
Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 15-2516
Kelly, Author, with Loken and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Products Liability. In action involving unintended acceleration in Toyota Camrys, the district court carefully weighed the admission of other similar incident evidence and did not abuse its discretion in admitting a limited number of substantially similar incidents; argument that the district court erred in allowing plaintiffs' expert to give his opinion regarding the cause of the unintended acceleration rejected as this…
Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor Corporation
Filed: June 9, 2017
Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 15-2638
Kelly, Author, with Loken and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Products Liability. In action involving unintended acceleration in Toyota Camrys, the district court carefully weighed the admission of other similar incident evidence and did not abuse its discretion in admitting a limited number of substantially similar incidents; argument that the district court erred in allowing plaintiffs' expert to give his opinion regarding the cause of the unintended acceleration rejected as this…
Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor Corporation
Filed: June 9, 2017
Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 15-2635
Kelly, Author, with Loken and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Products Liability. In action involving unintended acceleration in Toyota Camrys, the district court carefully weighed the admission of other similar incident evidence and did not abuse its discretion in admitting a limited number of substantially similar incidents; argument that the district court erred in allowing plaintiffs' expert to give his opinion regarding the cause of the unintended acceleration rejected as this…
Lisa Drayton v. Toyota Motor Credit Corporation
Filed: April 26, 2017
Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Case Number: 16-17252
DAVID GELBER V. TOYOTA MOTOR CORP
Filed: September 2, 2016
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Case Number: 13-56433
Lawrence Wilder, Sr. v. Toyota Motor Credit Corporation
Filed: July 25, 2016
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Case Number: 16-1267
Landry Dixon v. Toyota Motor Credit Corp.
Filed: July 23, 2015
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Case Number: 14-30426
Germain Real Estate v. HCH Toyota
Filed: February 6, 2015
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 13-3492
Civil case - Contacts. The court concludes that the Arkansas Supreme Court would hold that a dismissal without prejudice for failure to state facts upon which relief could be granted was a final judgment for purposes of issue preclusion; as a result, plaintiff were barred from relitigating the issue of plaintifff's purchase option in federal court; based on the state court's conclusion and the terms of the parties' subordination agreement, plaintiff was not entitled to specific…
Germain Real Estate Company v. HCH Toyota
Filed: February 6, 2015
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Case Number: 13-3723
Civil case - Contacts. The court concludes that the Arkansas Supreme Court would hold that a dismissal without prejudice for failure to state facts upon which relief could be granted was a final judgment for purposes of issue preclusion; as a result, plaintiff were barred from relitigating the issue of plaintifff's purchase option in federal court; based on the state court's conclusion and the terms of the parties' subordination agreement, plaintiff was not entitled to specific…
