Swindell v. Hellkamp

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a nearly five-year-old girl who darted into traffic could not be held contributorily negligent
• holding that children under seven are “conclusively presumed to be incapable of committing contributory negligence”
• concluding that a nearly five- year- old girl who darted into traffic could not be held contributorily negligent
• concluding that a nearly five- year- old girl who darted into traffic could not be held contributorily negligent
• holding that children under seven are “conclusively presumed to be incapable of committing contributory negligence”
• opining that children under six are “conclusively presumed to be incapable of committing contributory negligence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).