William Smith v. Airborne Freight Corporation

96 F.3d 1451 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. William SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. AIRBORNE FREIGHT CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-15348. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 15, 1996. Decided Sep. 6, 1996. 1 Before: PREGERSON and TROTT, Circuit Judges, and WINMILL, District Judge. * 2 MEMORANDUM ** OVERVIEW 3 Defendant-Appellant Airborne Freight Corporation ("Airborne") appeals the district court's denial of its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) and its alternative motion for a new trial, and challenges several evidentiary rulings made by the district court. Plaintiff-Appellee William Smith alleges that this appeal is frivolous and seeks damages and costs under Fed.R.App.P. 38. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Because we conclude that prejudicial and damaging testimony improperly admitted against Airborne deprived it of substantial rights at trial, we reverse and remand.…