Legal Opinion
Hudson v. District of Columbia
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided April 2, 2007No. Civil Action 02-2217 (RMC)PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
ROSEMARY M. COLLYER, District Judge.
Before the Court is Defendants’ motion for partial judgment as a matter of law, a new trial, and a remittitur [Dkt. # 85]. Because Plaintiffs failed to adduce adequate evidence from which a reasonably jury could conclude that Plaintiff Grace Hudson’s emotional injury was sufficiently serious under D.C. law, judgment as a matter of law will be granted to Defendants on her claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress. Defendants’ motion will be denied in all other respects.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This case arises out of an incident that…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Graham v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Brosseau v. HaugenSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Students Against Genocide v. Department of StateCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2001
- District of Columbia v. ChinnDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2003
- Williams v. BakerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Mazloum v. District of Columbia Metropolitan Police DepartmentDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2008
- Hudson v. District of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2009
- City of Saint Albans v. BotkinsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2011
- City of Saint Albans v. BotkinsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2011
- Paylor v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2024