Hafco Foundry & Mach. Co. v. GMS Mine Repair & Maint., Inc.

4 Citing cases

  1. Hafco Foundry & Machine Co., Inc. v. GMS Mine Repair & Maint., Inc.

    953 F.3d 745 (Fed. Cir. 2020)   Cited 2 times

    Hafco did not cross appeal on any issue relating to damages.Hafco Foundry & Mach. Co. v. GMS Mine Repair & Maint., Inc., Civ. No. 1:15-16143, 2018 WL 1582728, at *8-12 (S.D. W. Va. Mar. 30, 2018) ("Dist. Ct. Op."); id., 2018 WL 1733986 (S.D. W. Va. Apr. 10, 2018) ("Dist.

  2. Hafco Foundry & Mach. Co. v. GMS Mine Repair & Maint.

    2018-1904 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 16, 2020)   2 Legal Analyses

    On the remittitur that I recommend, this aspect would require our attention. Hafco Foundry & Mach. Co. v. GMS Mine Repair & Maint., Inc., Civ. No. 1:15-16143, 2018 WL 1582728, at *8-12 (S.D. W. Va. Mar. 30, 2018) ("Dist. Ct. Op."); id., 2018 WL 1733986 (S.D. W. Va. Apr. 10, 2018) ("Dist.

  3. Nazario v. Gutierrez

    Civil Action 2:21CV169 (RCY) (E.D. Va. May. 3, 2023)

    Hafco Foundry & Mach. Co., Inc. v. GMS Mine Repair & Maint., Inc., No. CV 1:15-16143, 2018 WL 1582728, at *7 (S.D. W.Va. Mar. 30, 2018). On review, “jury instructions must be viewed as a whole, and even when jury instructions are flawed, there can be no reversal unless the error seriously prejudiced the plaintiff's case.”

  4. Edwards v. Mcelliotts Trucking, LLC

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-1879 (S.D.W. Va. Dec. 11, 2018)   Cited 3 times
    In Edwards, the plaintiff sued for damages following an October 3, 2015 incident in which his foot was crushed while loading metal pipe onto a truck.

    A party seeking a new trial based on erroneous jury instructions must establish "(1) it made a proper and timely objection to the jury instructions; (2) those instructions were legally erroneous; (3) the errors had prejudicial effect; and (4) it requested alternative instructions that would have remedied the error." Hafco Foundry & Mach. Co., Inc. v. GMS Mine Repair & Maint., Inc., No. CV 1:15-16143, 2018 WL 1582728, at *7 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 30, 2018) (internal citations omitted). The determination of whether instructions were legally erroneous is a question of law.