Wallman v. United Casualty Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that removal was not proper, in spite of clear evidence of past sexual abuse, when there was no indication that “the child would be concealed or further abused during the time it would take to get a warrant”
• finding no justification for the removal of a child believed to be sexually abused in the past in light of the lack of harm that would have been caused by “the further delay of a few hours necessary to obtain the warrant”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).