Hilburn v. Hilburn

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a legal malpractice claim, based on the theft of “more than $500,000” was assignable as a right of property
• declining to decide whether HUD-1 settlement statements were part of the contract but citing authority questioning or rejecting this proposition
• “‘Personal torts’ are torts involving an injury to the person, to the reputation, or to feelings, as distinguished from an injury or damage to real or personal property, which is a property tort.”
• summary judgment as to causation appropriate only when \reasonable persons could not differ as to both the relevant facts and the evaluative application of legal standards (such as the legal concept of 'foreseeability') to the facts\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).