M.A. v. M.D.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that scientific facts are judicially noticeable
• focusing on what actor has done and not what remains to be done as applied to facts of case
• “[i]t is an abiding principle of jurisprudence that common sense does not take flight when one enters a courtroom”
• [i]t is an abiding principle of jurisprudence that common sense does not take flight when one enters a courtroom
• [i]t is an abiding principle of jurisprudence that common sense does not take flight when one enters a courtroom
• judicial notice may be taken of “facts which are capable of immediate and accurate demonstration by resort to easily accessible sources of indisputable accuracy”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).