Legal Opinion · Dissent

First American Bank, N.A. v. District of Columbia

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided December 11, 1990No. 86-741Published

1DissentFarrell, Associate Judge

I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that when the District of Columbia government tows and impounds cars, it acts in the role of a “bailee for hire” subject to an ordinary standard of negligence. Rather than equate the government in this respect with the owner of a commercial parking lot, I would hold that in exercising the police function of enforcing the motor vehicle laws, which may include impounding cars, the District acts in a manner akin to a “gratuitous bailee” and is liable only for gross negligence.

*999The District’s obligation to tow, impound, and store vehicles…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Prince v. Alabama State FairSupreme Court of Alabama · 1894
  2. Hester O'Neill Wilson v. Charles O. Bittinger, National Metropolitan Bank of Washington, and Thedistrict of Columbia, AppellesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1958
  3. Matoil Service & Transport Co. v. SchneiderCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1942
  4. Jeffres v. Countryside Homes of Lincoln, Inc.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Ritter v. CastelliniNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1980

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API