Legal Opinion
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority v. Bell
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided October 21, 1993No. 92-CV-587PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KING, Associate Judge:
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA), defendant in the trial court, appeals an adverse judgment claiming the trial court erred in denying its motion for a directed verdict. We conclude, applying Maryland law, that the evidence at trial was legally insufficient to establish negligence, and thus the ease should not have been submitted to the jury. Accordingly, we reverse.
I
On the morning of July 31, 1989, appellee, plaintiff in the trial court, boarded a metro-bus in New Carrollton, Maryland, traveling to Fairmont Heights, Maryland. She sat down in a seat…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Fowler v. A & A Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1970
- Vuitch v. FurrDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1984
- Charlton Bros. Transportation Co. v. GarrettsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1947
- Kaufman v. Baltimore Transit Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
- Byrd v. Allstate Insurance Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Pazmino v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
- Nicola v. Washington Times Corp.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2008
- N.P.P. Contractors, Inc. v. John Canning & Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
- Allstate Insurance v. CurtisDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
- Young v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2026