holding that active supervision unnecessary where challenged ordinance left defendants, car rental companies at Denver International Airport, virtually no discretionary authority in setting and collecting usage fees from their customers because usage fee determined by detailed formula
Summary of this case from Ports Authority v. Compañia Panameña de Aviacion (COPA), S.A.No. 97-133.
November 3, 1997.
C.A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 111 F. 3d 1495.
holding that active supervision unnecessary where challenged ordinance left defendants, car rental companies at Denver International Airport, virtually no discretionary authority in setting and collecting usage fees from their customers because usage fee determined by detailed formula
Summary of this case from Ports Authority v. Compañia Panameña de Aviacion (COPA), S.A.holding that " bare allegation that certain witnesses made 'prior inconsistent' statements without stating what was said and how it conflicted with what was testified to at trial is a conclusion, not a fact"
Summary of this case from Cofield v. Statefinding that prejudice "refers to the inherent unfairness—in terms of delay, expense, or damage to a party's legal position—that occurs when the party's opponent forces it to litigate an issue and later seeks to arbitrate that same issue"
Summary of this case from Schwartz v. Cach, LLCrejecting the notion that temporal proximity, without more, can be sufficient proof of showing causation in retaliation cases
Summary of this case from Purvis v. Tex. A&M Univ.Full title:ZIMOMRA v. ALAMO RENT-A-CAR, INC., Et Al
Court:U.S.
Date published: Nov 3, 1997
"In order to show that the validity of the agreement is 'in issue,' the party opposing arbitration must show…
Wright v. BarrCounsel's Russian roulette remark in opening statement was not improper because it placed before the jury and…