Yun You v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• Corum claim not available because plaintiff had tort claims in the Industrial -9- WASHINGTON V. CLINE Opinion of the Court Commission, despite “limited” damages available on those claims
• “[O]ur precedent following Corum defines the adequacy of a remedy as a plaintiff’s ability to recover for a particular harm and not as a plaintiff’s ability to recover against a particular defendant.”
• “[B]ecause . . . there was a genuine issue of material fact as to the applicability of public official immunity, the plaintiff still ha[d] a chance to obtain relief[,] regardless of the heightened burden.”
• “While the law generally allows plaintiffs to select the defendants from whom they wish to obtain relief, such is not the case when doing so requires the extraordinary exercise of the judiciary’s constitutional power necessary to permit a Corum claim.”
• “A Corum claim is available to a plaintiff who is able to establish that (1) her state constitutional rights have been violated, and (2) she lacks any sort of ‘adequate state remedy.’” (quoting Corum, 330 N.C. at 782, 413 S.E.2d at 289)
• “A Corum claim is available to a plaintiff who is able to establish that (1) her state constitutional rights have been violated, and (2) she lacks any sort of ‘adequate state remedy.’” (quoting Corum, 330 N.C. at 782, 413 S.E.2d at 289)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).