The following excerpt is from Kyocera Corp. v. Prudential-Bache Trade, 299 F.3d 769 (9th Cir. 2002):
Where, as here, the parties stipulate to facts which form the basis for a further inference of fact, "the factual inference to be drawn is not per se a question of law and the law controls only the reasonableness of the inference." McKinney v. Kull, 118 Cal.App.3d 951, 956, 173 Cal. Rptr. 696 (1981) (citation omitted). "Where the inferences are conflicting, it is for the trier of fact to resolve the conflict
Page 779
in the absence of a rule of law specifying the inference to be drawn." Id.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.