Janssen v. American Hawaii Cruises, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a “defendant owes a duty of care only to those who are foreseeably endangered by the conduct”
• stating that “a defendant owes a duty of care only to those who are foresee-ably endangered by the conduct and only with respect to those risks or hazards whose likelihood made the conduct unreasonably dangerous”
• stating that \a defendant owes a duty of care only to those who are foreseeably endangered by the conduct and only with respect to those risks or hazards whose likelihood made the conduct unreasonably dangerous\
• union did not owe a duty of care to ship’s waiter in the hiring of ship’s chef because sexual attack on waiter was not foreseeable consequences of chef’s employment
• “[A] defendant owes a duty of care only to those who are foreseeably endangered by the conduct and only with respect to those risks or hazards whose likelihood made the conduct unreasonably dangerous.” (Citations and internal quotation marks omitted.
• “[A] defendant owes a duty of care only to those who are foreseeably endangered by the conduct and only with respect to those risks or hazards whose likelihood made the conduct unreasonably dangerous.” (Citations and internal quotation marks omitted.) (Emphasis added.)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).