Rice v. Janovich

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 trial court erred by giving jury instructions for both assault and outrage for the same conduct because it allowed for the possibility of double recovery
• holding that plaintiff who recovered civil damages under assault theory could not also recover damages arising from tort of outrage in connection with the same conduct
• holding that the trial court erred by giving jury instructions for both assault and outrage for the same conduct because it allowed for the possibility of double recovery
• holding that the trial court erred by giving jury instructions for both assault and outrage for the same conduct because it allowed for the possibility of double recovery
• holding that the trial court erred by giving jury instructions for both assault and outrage for the same conduct because it allowed for the possibility of double recovery
• holding that “RICO provides 16 neither the explicit statutory direction or unmistakable implication of exclusivity, nor 17 clear incompatibility with state court jurisdiction sufficient to overcome the presumption 18 of concurrent jurisdiction”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).