Ramstad v. Hodel

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 plaintiff “was simply a member of the public at large”
• holding that the release of an inmate on parole, who eventually murdered a citizen, did not violate the Due Process Clause because “there is [no] showing that the victim, as distinguished from the public at large, faces a special danger”
• finding no liability where plaintiff did not claim that the state actors should have known that their actions endangered the decedent
• release of a parolee only endangered plaintiff as a member of the public at large
• targeted threat against one person did not create a special relationship with a member of the general public
• a parolee's release endangered plaintiff as a member of the public at large

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).