Legal Opinion
Piper v. Andrews
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided March 25, 1963No. Civ. A. No. 2244-59PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
YOUNGDAHL, District Judge.
a verdict an action for negligence, and the defendant1 has moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and in the alternative for a new trial. The grounds for defendant’s motion are that the last clear chance doctrine and a portion of the Traffic and Motor Vehicle Regulations for the District of Columbia should not have been submitted to the jury, and that the Court improperly denied the defendant’s motion for a mistrial after the plaintiff’s attorney made certain statements concerning damages.
1. As far as the last clear chance-is concerned, the Court instructed…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- McDermott v. SevereSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Washington & Georgetown Railroad v. HickeySupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- The Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. Robert Livingston Pomeroy, of the Estate of Elizabeth Eagan PomeroyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1957
- Evening Star Newspaper Company v. GrayDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1962
- Capital Transit Co. v. GarciaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1952
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Regina Queen v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1990
- Caldwell v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2001
- Georges Pierre Joligard v. Gifty N. Addy, State Farm Mutual Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1992