Beresford N. Springer v. Gretchen Seaman

How courts have described this case

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

• applying traditional tort rules concerning proximate causation to § 1983 claims
• “[n]ot only fact questions, but also ‘evaluative applications of legal standards [such as the legal concept of ‘foreseeability’] to the facts’ are properly jury questions”
• in tort law, not only ordinary fact questions but also \evaluative applications of legal standards (such as the legal concept of 'foreseeability') to the facts are properly jury questions\
• “although ‘the question of proximate causation [in a § 1983 action] is sometimes for the 3 | court and sometimes for the jury,’ the court decides whether reasonable disagreement on the issue 4 | is tenable”
• similarly describing intervening causes in tort law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).