Hoffman v. Dautel

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that novelty is not enough to prevent recovery but declining to conclude that the plaintiffs had alleged a new cause of action for loss of consortium by a child
• “[i]t is common knowledge that a parent who suffers serious physical or mental injuiy is unable to give his minor children the parental care, training, love and companionship in the same degree as he might have but for the injury”
• “[a] minor child has no cause of action for damages arising out of the disability of its father, caused by negligence of the defendant, with attendant loss of acts of parental guidance, love, society, companionship and other incidences of the parent-child relationship”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).