Ansin v. Thurston

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing district courts as “primarily of final appellate jurisdiction,” their decisions “in most instances being final and absolute”
• holding the district courts of appeal were never intended to be intermediate courts, and review by the district courts are final and absolute in most instances
• “A limitation of review to decisions in ‘direct conflict’ clearly evinces a concern with decisions as precedents as opposed to adjudications of the rights of particular litigants.”
• “A limitation of review to decisions in ‘direct conflict’ clearly evinces a concern with decisions as precedents as opposed to adjudications of the rights of particular litigants.”
• “A limitation of review to decisions in ‘direct conflict’ clearly evinces a concern with decisions as precedents as opposed to adjudications of the rights of particular litigants.”
• the district courts of appeal were not intended to be intermediate courts

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).