Munro v. Ogden

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that no duty existed where there was ‘‘no overriding public policy or statute that compels [the] court to extend liability based on the facts of the present case’’
• “ ‘A simple conclusion that the harm to the plaintiff was foreseeable, however, cannot by itself mandate a determination that a legal duty exists. Many harms are quite literally foreseeable, yet for pragmatic reasons, no recovery is allowed.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).