Lacey v. Reitsma

How courts have described this case

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

• describing the language of the RUS as \unambiguous\ and noting the \equally unambiguous nature of the relevant precedent\
• describing the language of the RUS as “unambiguous” and noting the “equally unambiguous nature of the relevant precedent”
• applying the recreational use statute, but noting the Court’s concerns and affording the Legislature an opportunity to revisit the statute: “Perhaps the time has come for the General Assembly to revisit the provisions of the Recreational Use Statute[.]”
• “[W]e find it troubling (to say the least) to be confronted with a legal regime whereby the users of state and municipal recreational sites must be classified for tort law purposes ‘as though they were trespassers.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).