Estate of Johnson v. Badger Acquisition

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming summary judgment in favor of a pharmacist because the plaintiff had not established a duty of care arising from the Pharmacy Act and the Act did not set forth a legislative intent to create a private cause of action
• affirming summary judgment in favor of a pharmacist because, the plaintiff had not established a duty of care arising from the Pharmacy Act and the Act, did. not. set forth a legislative intent to create a private cause of action
• “An appellate court’s review of summary judgment on a pure question of law is de novo.”
• \An appellate court's review of summary judgment on a pure question of law is de novo.\
• “While breach, causation, and damages are typically questions for the finder of fact, the determination of duty is a matter of law.”
• “When interpreting a statute, ‘shall’ is generally read as being mandatory while ‘may’ suggests a permissive term.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).