Legal Opinion

Roe v. Doe

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided August 8, 2013No. 12-CV-970PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WASHINGTON, Chief Judge:

In June 2011, appellee Jane Doe sued appellant John Roe1 claiming that he negligently infected her with herpes during their relationship in 2010.2 Appellant appeals from a jury verdict finding him liable for one count of negligent infliction of herpes and argues that the judgment should be reversed and the case remanded because the trial judge abused his discretion in imposing on him a disproportionately severe discovery sanction for his failure to properly provide sexually transmitted disease (“STD”) test results to appellee. For the reasons articulated below, we find…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Sharon Bonds v. District of Columbia and Director, District of Columbia Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1996
  2. Perry v. SeraDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
  3. Braxton v. Howard UniversityDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1984
  4. Weiner v. KnellerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1989
  5. Vincent v. AndersonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Shirley Bolton v. Crowley, Hoge & Fein, P.C.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2015
  2. Farmer v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API