Romanesk v. Rose

How courts have described this case

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

• in turn, quoting 4 DeWitt C. Blashfield, Cyclopedia of Automobile Law and Practice § 2771 (1946 ed.)
• “When dealing with ... a [gross negligence] standard, bald and conclusory allegations will not suffice; specificity is required.” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “‘a wrongdoer is guilty of gross negligence or acts wantonly and willfully only when he inflicts injury intentionally or is so utterly indifferent to the rights of others that he acts as if such rights did not exist’ ”
• “Whether or not gross negligence exists necessarily depends on the facts and circumstances in each case. It is usually a question for the jury and is a question of law only when reasonable men could differ as to the rational conclusion to be reached.”
• “Whether or not gross negligence exists necessarily depends on the facts and circumstances in each case” and “is usually a question for the jury and is a question of law only when reasonable [people] could not differ as to the rational conclusion to be reached.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).