Parker v. Silviano

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the “lack of such [sufficiently specific] evidence authorized the trial court to find that the [plaintiffs] failed to meet [their] burden” in showing diligence
• holding plaintiff’s references to deposition testimony could not be considered on summary-judgment motion of driver’s employer on claim of negligent entrustment because depositions were not filed before trial court ruled on motion
• references to deposition testimony cannot be considered where the depositions were not filed prior to the time judgment was entered
• plaintiffs supplied process server with an incorrect address and failed to set forth any evidence supporting their claim of due diligence
• plaintiffs supplied process server with an incorrect address and failed to set forth any evidence supporting their claim of due diligence
• “This [Cjourt is a court for the correction of errors and it does not consider matters which were not raised and ruled on by the trial court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).