Answered step by step
Verified Expert Solution
Question
1 Approved Answer
A consulting firm sued a cable television franchise under federal diversity jurisdiction for breach of contract based on the firm's provision of technical services. At
A consulting firm sued a cable television franchise under federal diversity jurisdiction for breach of contract based on the firm's provision of technical services. At trial, a witness testified to a conversation she had overhead between both companies' representatives. The conversation was unfavorable to the cable TV franchise, so it raised a timely hearsay objection, which the court overruled. During the parties' closing arguments, the consulting firm's attorney referred to facts that the judge had excluded from evidence. The cable TV franchise's attorney objected to this part of the closing argument as an impermissible comment on matters not in evidence. The judge overruled the objection. The jury then rendered a verdict for the consulting firm. One day after the verdict, the cable TV franchise filed an affidavit from a witness swearing that she had observed the consulting firm's attorney attempting to influence one of the jurors. Which one of the following grounds, if legally supported, would be improper to raise in the cable TV franchise's Rule 59 motion for a new trial? (A) The judge erred in admitting the hearsay evidence. (B) The post-trial affidavit supports attorney misconduct. (C) Insufficient evidence supported the consulting firm's breach of contract claim. (D)
Step by Step Solution
There are 3 Steps involved in it
Step: 1
Get Instant Access to Expert-Tailored Solutions
See step-by-step solutions with expert insights and AI powered tools for academic success
Step: 2
Step: 3
Ace Your Homework with AI
Get the answers you need in no time with our AI-driven, step-by-step assistance
Get Started