Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. v. Tapemark Co.

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 issue of foreseeability should be submitted to the jury where “reasonable persons might differ”
• holding that a fact issue precluded summary judgment when “reasonable persons might differ” as to the foreseeability of a car being stolen arid injuring another person
• remanding to the district court for consideration of whether the allegedly negligent party “knew or should have known” of the dangerous circumstances
• “[W]here there is a genuine issue as to the existence of special circumstances [indicating foreseeability of the injury], summary judgment for the defendant is inappropriate.”
• negligence, although normally a fact question, is susceptible to summary adjudication where the material fact issues are undisputed and as a matter of law compel only one conclusion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).