In re the Expunction of O.R.T.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that whether collateral estoppel applies is a question of law and, therefore, “summary judgment is an appropriate vehicle for resolving the same”
• stating that whether collateral estoppel applies is a question of law and, therefore, “summary judgment is an appropriate vehicle for resolving the same”
• stating that whether collateral estoppel applies is a question of law and, therefore, “summary judgment is an appropriate vehicle for resolving the same”
• stating that whether collateral estoppel applies is a question of law so that “summary judgment is an appropriate vehicle for resolving the issue”
• defining purely economic losses as “essentially damages for failed commercial expectations, or loss of the benefit of the bargain”
• adopting §§ 29 and 85 of the Restatement (Second) of Judgments for determining when to apply nonmutual collateral estoppel

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).