Boullt v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “the evidence is insufficient to support a finding that the defendant intended to damage or destroy the telephone as opposed to acting with malice towards the victim”
• reversing conviction for criminal mischief when State’s evidence was insufficient to support a finding that the defendant intended to damage or destroy the victim’s property

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).