Topic: for it does not sustain an inference of consciousness of a … · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #8276

5 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 44 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from 10 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1092, 9 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 10,203 Mary Vick, Cross-Appellee v. Texas Employment Commission, Cross-Appellant.

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 10 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1092, 9 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 10,203 Mary Vick, Cross-Appellee v. Texas Employment Commission, Cross-Appellant Anchor
ca5 · 1975
green “for it does not sustain an inference of consciousness of a weak case.” 11
2 Kronisch v. United States
ca2 · 1998
green “derives from the common sense notion that a party's destruction of evidence which it has reason to believe may be used against it in litigation suggests that the evidence was harmful to the party responsible for its destruction.” 11
3 Kronisch v. United States
ca2 · 1998
green “places the risk of an erroneous judgment on the party that wrongfully created the risk.” 10
4 10 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1092, 9 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 10,203 Mary Vick, Cross-Appellee v. Texas Employment Commission, Cross-Appellant
ca5 · 1975
green “mere negligence is not enough, for it does not sustain an inference of consciousness of a weak case.” 8
5 10 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1092, 9 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 10,203 Mary Vick, Cross-Appellee v. Texas Employment Commission, Cross-Appellant
ca5 · 1975
green “it does not sustain an inference of consciousness of a weak case.” 4

A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check