Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 1991

Broan Manufacturing Co. v. Associated Distributors, Inc.

Broan Manufacturing Co. v. Associated Distributors, Inc.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Decided April 29, 1991 · Engel, Kennedy, Milburn
932 F.2d 1146; 1991 WL 74168 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

John C. Speer, Heiskell, Donelson, Bear-man, Adams, Williams & Kirsch, Memphis, Tenn., Francis W. Deisinger, Stephen T. Jacobs (argued), Christine L. Thierfelder, Reinhart, Boerner, Van Deuren, Norris & Rieselbach, Milwaukee, Wis., for plaintiff-appellee, cross-appellant., Jef Feibelman (argued), Burch, Porter & Johnson, Memphis, Tenn., Dick Wilson, Jr., Dillard, Greer, Westmoreland & Wilson, Atlanta, Ga., for defendants-appellants, cross-appellees.

Broan Manufacturing Co. v. Associated Distributors, Inc.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

ORDER

KENNEDY, Circuit Judge.

Upon consideration of Broan’s Motion for Reconsideration of Remand or, in the Alternative, to Dismiss Broan’s Cross-Appeal and Affirm the Verdict Without Remand, the court denies Broan’s motion for reconsideration and grants Broan’s motion to dismiss the cross-appeal.

Although we noted that the District Court did not instruct the jury to reduce future damages to present value, neither party requested such an instruction or objected to its absence. Nor was the issue raised on appeal. Failure to give such an instruction does not amount to plain error in this case. Cf. Kokesh v. American S.S. Co., 747 F.2d 1092, 1095-96 (6th Cir. 1984).

Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.