M.F. Fletcher & Associates, Inc. v. Caramanica

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “it is usually inappropriate for a federal court to . . . in effect direct the Coast Guard how to spend its limited resources” and that “[e]very dollar of [Coast Guard] money that we direct it spend is diverted from another regulatory activity”
• explaining that “it is usually inappropriate for a federal court to . . . in effect direct the Coast Guard how to spend its limited resources” and that “[e]very dollar of [Coast Guard] money that we direct it spend is diverted from another regulatory activity”
• \The government appeals from that judgment on the ground that it was under no duty to provide additional lighting on the dike. We agree with the government's contention....\ (emphasis added)
• \Plaintiff here has presented us with no authority and has introduced no evidence that would impose upon anyone a duty to mark the dike any more clearly than the United States did in this case.\ (emphasis added)
• \The government appeals from that judgment on the ground that it was under no duty to provide additional lighting on the dike. We agree with the government's contention . . . .\ (emphasis added)
• “[A] decisive issue in this case is whether the United States was under a duty to provide additional lighting or some other type of marking on the dike as a warning to boaters in the area.” (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).