· 5/10/1909

Carson v. Slattery

Citations

123 La. 825
49 So. 586
1909 La. LEXIS 789

Syllabus

1. Seduction (§ 17*) — Evidence—No Peomise Broken. The testimony does not sustain plaintiff’s averment that defendant promised to marry her. [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Seduction, Dec. Dig. § 17.*] 2. In Paei Delicto — Right oe Action. Equal fault on both sides makes the parties equal in law. 3. Seduction (§ 17*) — Volenti Non Fit In-' JURIA. The plaintiff was not free from fault. From that point of view damages cannot be allowed. [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Seduction, Dec. Dig. § 17,*] (Syllabus by the Court.)

How courts have described this case

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

observing that NCAA’s “own witnesses” testified that “consumer demand for [D1] basketball and FBS football is driven largely by consumers’ perception that student-athletes are, in fact, students”
stating, “the [c]ourt need not individually 1 analyze every claim if certain claims are representative”
noting that conferences are legislative bodies under the Bylaws
discussing Student-Athletes’ survey, which indicated that consumers would continue to view and attend college sports events even if student-athletes received academic or graduation incentive payments of up to $10,000
“In O’Bannon I, the Court had found that the plaintiffs’ antitrust claims could be analyzed as a monopoly or, alternatively, as a monopsony.”
“the [c]ourt need not individually 17 analyze every claim if certain claims are representative.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Breaux

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.