Loftin v. Lee

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that party failed to preserve complaints that statute was vague and violated open-courts and due-course- of-law guarantees
• concluding that party failed to preserve complaints that statute was vague and violated open courts and due course of law guarantees by not raising those issues with trial court
• holding that when the owner of the horse already generally knows the participant’s experience level in dealing with horses, former section 87.004(2) does not require a formal, searching inquiry into a participant’s ability to safely manage the equine
• explaining that section 87.004(2) could not be construed to impose strict liability for an inadequate determination of a participant’s ability
• explaining that section 87.004(2) could not be construed to impose strict liability for an inadequate determination of a participant’s ability
• finding “conflicting inferences regarding the normalcy of alleged risks present on the selected trail” and whether an exception applied

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).