Honda Motor Co. said plaintiffs violated appellate procedure by raising issues outside the pre-argument briefs in last week’s Pennsylvania Superior Court oral arguments over jury instructions in a closely watched case over crashworthiness.
Honda submitted a five-page post-argument brief to the Superior Court on Aug. 12 in Martinez v. American Honda Motor. The brief, which included asking the court for permission to formally file the submission, was aimed at addressing what Honda called “unbriefed issues” raised by the plaintiffs at oral argument. (For more on the oral argument, see the bottom of page 1 story titled, “Honda: Crashworthiness Jury Instructions Fail in Wake of ‘Tincher’” in this week’s edition of Pennsylvania Law Weekly.)
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
