Legal Opinion
Messina v. District of Columbia
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided August 17, 1995No. 94-CV-17PublishedCited by 55 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KING, Associate Judge:
In this negligence action against the District of Columbia (“District”), appellant Gary Messina (“Messina”), father and next friend of minor Karyne Messina (“Karyne”), seeks reversal of the entry of judgment as a matter of law in favor of the District, contending that the testimony of his expert witness was sufficient to establish the requisite standard of care. Messina also contends that it was reversible error for Judge Burgess to deny his motion to amend the pre-trial order to permit the testimony of a new witness. 1
For the reasons set forth below, we hold that,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- District of Columbia v. WhiteDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
- Toy v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- Meek v. ShepardDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1984
- District of Columbia v. PetersDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
- District of Columbia v. CarmichaelDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by55 opinions
- Butera v. District of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2001
- Evans-Reid v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
- Dormu v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
- Clark v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
- Briggs v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2007
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.