Bassick Mfg. Co. v. Larkin Automotive Parts Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• emphasizing that “rehabilitation was not undertaken at the spur of impending prosecution”
• declining to hear an ineffective assistance claim on direct appeal because \the record [was] undeveloped\
• finding consent even though appellant, having been warned of monitoring, was not specifically told that use of prison telephones constituted consent or that monitoring could include recording
• finding implied consent where a sign near all prison telephones warned that calls were subject to monitoring, the inmate handbook warned that calls were monitored, and the inmate indicated knowledge that the call might be monitored and used coded language during the call
• notice provided in signs at telephones, in orientation handbook, and in state regulations
• “[o]nly a single participant in a conversation need agree to the monitoring in order to satisfy the requirements of the Fourth Amendment” and inmate use of prison telephone with knowledge of monitoring practice constitutes such agreement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).