Rodriguez v. Peake

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that there was no “significant connection to past events” where party did not “rely to her detriment on the prior state of the law”
• noting that clarification of an already existing policy does not constitute substantial change in the law
• noting that trial court erred in failing to apply court’s three-part test in analyzing retroac-tivity
• noting that clarification of an already existing policy does not constitute substantial change in the law
• \Rodriguez did not rely to her detriment on the prior state of the law.\
• “Rodriguez did not rely to her detriment on the prior state of the law.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).