Succession of Falcone

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 fact that defendant posted signs restricting the use of the lake in dangerous areas did not controvert the fact that the lake was open to the public
• holding that a fee charged by a marina to dock boats \is not an admission price but merely an operational or maintenance charge\
• holding that the fact that defendant posted signs restricting the use of the lake in dangerous areas did not controvert the fact that the lake was open to the public
• Holding similar statute not violative of equal protection or due process as rationally related to legitimate governmental purpose
• holding a recreational use statute constitutional because it did not preclude litigants from the right to redress for a particular injury, but, rather, redefined the injury that warrants redress or the class of persons who have a right to redress
• signs posted by defendants restricting use in certain locations on lake did not raise material factual issue where entire lake was considered major state recreational area

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).