Comments on Recent Cases: September 2022

Image credit

Part of my work involves reading court decisions to keep abreast of how judges decide the types of cases I handle. Below, I share some thoughts on recent decisions.

Court Declines to Reconsider Jury’s Assessment of Witness Credibility

An appeal is generally not an opportunity to re-argue the facts of a case after a trial. Instead, appellate courts largely defer to a jury’s conclusions.

A recent case before the state appellate court in Brooklyn illustrates this principle. After two cars collided, each claiming to have a green light, one driver sued the other for damages. The jury decided the defendant was not negligent, but the plaintiff’s lawyer asked the judge and the appellate court for a new trial. Among other things, the plaintiff’s lawyer argued that the defendant was not credible, citing his “countless obfuscations,” “utterly poor demeanor,” “screaming,” and “storming out of the courtroom.” He contrasted this with the plaintiff’s “calm demeanor” and “straightforward answers.” Ultimately, both courts refused to disturb the jury’s conclusion.

Decisions like this illustrate how difficult it is to reverse a jury verdict on the facts.

Court Reviews Whole Agreement to Interpret Individual Provision

A contract provision may seem clear to someone, but a court may not always see it the same way. Frequently, litigation arises because another party reads the contract differently. And a court may interpret a contract provision differently than its plain language because of what that language may mean in light of the other provisions of the agreement.

For example, in a recent case, the state appellate court in Manhattan considered an agreement that explicitly permitted an employer to "defer any cash payment until it has sufficient funds to do so." It held that the employer violated the agreement when it deferred a payment because another provision of the contract "shall" pay amounts due to an employee when his employment ended. In its interpretation, the former provision only applied when the employee was still working for the company, but stopped being effective once he no longer worked for the company.

Cases like this illustrate why an analysis of an entire contract may be necessary to predict how a court will interpret any individual clause, even when that clause may seem clear on its own.

Court Rejects Lengthy “Manifesto” Complaint

A lot of people have already written about Donald Trump’s recent litigation against, among others, Hillary Clinton. But I want to discuss one aspect of the decision that dismissed the lawsuit.

Mr. Trump’s complaint was approximately 200 pages long and filled with dramatic language. His lawyers may have believed that a long complaint would seem strong and or substantial. But the court observed that federal courts actually require complaints be a “short and plain statement” of the plaintiff’s claims. And it heavily criticized the “shotgun pleading” that was more confusing than persuasive.

The decision to dismiss the case, among other things, illustrates why a tightly written complaint serves a litigant better than pleadings like the “manifesto” that the court rejected.

Competition Authorities Scrutinize Potential Merger

The Wall Street Journal quoted me in an article about the merger between Microsoft and Activision Blizzard. Since most of my clients are businesses, I try to learn as much as I can about their industries, challenges, and goals. This kind of background is helpful in providing useful advice.

Court Upholds Summary Judgment for Defendant Before Discovery Where Plaintiff Failed to Submit Evidence

Although every litigant is entitled to have a court consider her claims, not every case makes it to trial or even to discovery.  If a plaintiff fails to submit a basis for success at trial or for why discovery could uncover relevant evidence, a court may dismiss a lawsuit early in the litigation.

This happened in a case arising from a car accident before the state appellate court in Brooklyn.  The defendant submitted a sworn statement that he was not at fault, which was consistent with a statement the plaintiff gave the police.  The plaintiff did not submit any evidence, only a statement from his lawyer.  The appeals court upheld dismissal of the case on summary judgment before discovery, since the plaintiff failed to carry his burden to establish that there was some evidence to consider at trial or that discovery could yield relevant evidence.  In particular, the court affirmed that the plaintiff could not just speculate that discovery would later reveal helpful evidence.

Cases like this illustrate the importance of presenting evidence on a summary judgment motion.