From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.
Langness v. Fencil Urethane Systems
North Dakota Supreme Court
667 N.W.2d 596 (2003)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
Duane Langness (plaintiff) sued Fencil Urethane Systems, Inc. (Fencil) (defendant) for negligently exposing him to toxic chemicals. At trial, Fencil’s attorney cross-examined Langness about whether Langness had ever filed any other lawsuits. Langness responded that he had filed one previous lawsuit. Fencil’s attorney then attempted to impeach Langness by questioning him about prior lawsuits that he had supposedly filed, claiming that the questions went to Langness’s credibility. The jury found for Fencil, and Langness appealed. On appeal, Langness argued that the cross-examination questions about prior lawsuits were irrelevant and should have been excluded.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Maring, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
