Lamantia v. City of Cranston, 97-4240 (2001)

How courts have described this case

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

• stating \both of the parties' petroleum engineering experts essentially agreed on how crude oil was processed\
• stating the Government \took a different tack in its closing argument\ after it \misstat[ed] the but[ ]for causation standard\
• describing the \critical role assumed by the oil companies during World War II to increase production of military aviation gasoline and related acid waste disposal issues\
• stating that to recover expectation damages for a breach of contract, the plaintiff “must show that: ‘(1) the damages were reasonably foreseeable by the breaching party at the time of contracting; (2) the breach is a substantial causal factor in the damages; and (3
• applying \but for\ language to the non-contractual avgas analysis
• discussing expert testimony on clean up method chosen

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).