Floyd v. Donahue

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the continuing-tort doctrine did not apply because “each claimed act is a separate assault causing separate as well as cumulative injury”
• the continuing-tort doctrine did not apply because “each claimed act is a separate assault causing separate as well as cumulative injury”
• two-year statute of limitations applied to personal injury claims stemming from sexual abuse occurring from 1970 to 1992
• cause of action accrued as matter of law when plaintiff began treatment at sexual abuse center, showing she “had reason to know her father‟s abuse [had] caused her injury”
• dicta; rejecting application of rule to repeated sexual assault claims
• applying continuing violation doctrine 15 to tort law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).