Hoskins Lumber Co. v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• applying Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-10-118 (2)(a) to Colorado tort claim asserted in federal action
• applying Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-10-118(2)(a) to Colorado tort claim asserted in federal action
• rejecting an inference of recklessness where “the facts . . . present no obvious basis on which to build a case of recklessness by inference”
• rejecting inference of recklessness where the record provided “no grounds for believing that the mistake was the result of any invidious animus”
• “Nothing in the language of section 1963 grants authority to a 25 1 This is not plaintiff’s first attempt at seeking relief pursuant to a “Shaykamaxum” court 26 judgment. See, e.g., Jolivette v. California, No. 2:13-cv-2322-APG-NJK (D. Nev.
• “[F]ailure to investigate a matter fully, to exhaust every possible lead, interview all potential witnesses, and accumulate overwhelming corroborative evidence rarely suggests a knowing or reckless disregard for the truth.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).