Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Saucier v. Plummer, No. 09-60873, involved an action for breach of an oral contract to split commissions on a sale. The court of appeals affirmed the district court's order reducing the damages awarded to plaintiff by the jury, on the ground that plaintiff's attorney, in closing argument, limited the scope of plaintiff's claim by telling the jury to award damages solely for one category of the commissions at issue.
As the court wrote: "In summary, although nothing indicates that Saucier and Plummer entered into separate agreements for the division of commissions from the sale of Legacy I and Legacy II units, Saucier's attorney limited the scope of her claim by telling the jury to award damages solely for Legacy I commissions. The jury closely followed that instruction. The district court did not violate our mandate and properly denied Legacy II commissions."