Markowitz v. Arizona Parks Board

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the State owed a duty to plaintiff because it “invited and indeed encouraged [plaintiff] and others to come to a parcel of land specifically dedicated to extensive public use and enjoyment”
• noting that \the existence of a duty is not to be confused with details of the standard of conduct\
• noting that “the existence of a duty is not to be confused with details of the standard of conduct”
• noting that a question of breach of duty is a fact question properly submitted to a jury
• explaining that the concept of duty should not be confused with the specific details of conduct
• explaining that the concept of duty should not be confused with the specific details of conduct

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Markowitz v. Arizona Parks Board

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• Markowitz v. Arizona Parks Board
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1984-11-06· cited 10×