In Re African-American Slave Descendants Litigation. Appeals of Deadria Farmer-Paellmann, and Timothy Hurdle

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that descendants of former slaves claiming to sue as representatives of their ancestors’ estates authorized to sue on their behalf “just have to prove the injury to the ancestors; the trickle-down question is elided”
• noting that it would be “impossible” for descendant of slaves “to prove injury, requiring as that would connecting the particular slavery transactions in which the defendants were involved to harm to particular slaves”
• rejecting application of the continuing violation theory to claims made on behalf of ancestors as making statutes of limitations “toothless”
• “When a person is wronged he can seek redress, and if he wins, his descendants may benefit, but the wrong to the ancestor is not a wrong to the descendants.”
• “[T]here is a fatal disconnect between the victims and the plaintiffs. When a person is wronged he can seek redress, and if he wins, his descendants may benefit, but the wrong to the ancestor is not a wrong to the descendants.”
• “[T]here is a fatal disconnect between the victims and the plaintiffs. When a person is wronged he can seek redress, and if he wins, his descendants may benefit, but the wrong to the ancestor is not a wrong to the descendants.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).