Weld v. Maxwell

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 district court did not err in relying on [the plaintiff’s] failure to adduce evidence regarding the elements of his [negligence] claim” in granting summary judgment
• holding that “the district court did not err in relying on [the plaintiff's] failure to adduce evidence regarding the elements of his [negligence] claim” in granting summary judgment
• holding that “the district court did not err in relying on [the plaintiff’s] failure to adduce evidence regarding the elements of his [negligence] claim” in granting summary judgment
• holding that “the district court did not err in relying on [the plaintiff’s] failure to adduce evidence regarding the elements of his [negligence] claim in granting [summary judgment]”
• holding that “the district court did not err in relying on [the plaintiff’s] failure to adduce evidence regarding the elements of his [negligence] claim in granting [summary judgment]”
• holding that “the district court did not err in relying on [the plaintiffs] failure to adduce evidence regarding the elements of his [negligence] claim in granting” summary judgment, as “there is no evidence that the [defendant] created the wet floor condition that caused [the plaintiffs] fall”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).