Elizabeth Graham Flowers Frankie Dukes v. Tandy Corporation, and William Lee Flowers Martha Floyd Graham

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 seller could not be held liable when it lacked “any knowledge of [the] intended use of the device”
• noting that, in criminal context, a defendant may be found guilty of aiding and abetting if he \shared in the principal's criminal intent\
• stating that “implied causes of action are disfavored and should be found only where a statute clearly indicates that ... Congress intended such a cause of action to lie”
• holding, before the 1986 amendment to § 2520, that § 2520 does not provide a cause of action against a person who violates § 2512 by manufacturing or selling a prohibited device, but does not engage in conduct violative of § 2511 by actual interception
• finding no liability for “the mere selling” of the device
• rejecting liability for illegal manufacture or sale

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).