· 2/28/2007
Sigmund v. Starwood Urban Investment
Citations
- 475 F. Supp. 2d 36
- 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13536
- 2007 WL 613840
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting that a heightened showing of foreseeability “requires proof that the specific type of crime, not just crime in general, be particularly foreseeable at the relevant location”
- noting that “the D.C. Court of Appeals requires proof that the specific type of crime, not just crime in general, be particularly foreseeable at the relevant location”
- noting that a heightened showing of foreseeability “requires proof that the specific type of crime, not just crime in general, be particularly foreseeable at the relevant location”
- noting that a heightened showing of foreseeability “requires proof that the specific type of crime, not just crime in general, be particularly foreseeable at the relevant location”
- noting that “the D.C. Court of Appeals requires proof that the specific type of crime, not just crime in general, be particularly foreseeable at the relevant location”
- noting that a heightened showing of foreseeability “requires proof that the specific type of crime, not just crime in general, be particularly foreseeable at the relevant location”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Huvelle
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.