Scott v. James
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1DissentSchwelb, Associate Judge
In my opinion, the evidence presented by the plaintiff, viewed in the light most favorable to her, was sufficient to present a jury question under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. I am therefore unable to join in my colleagues’ decision to affirm the trial judge’s direction of a verdict in the defendants’ favor.
I
On May 22, 1992, the plaintiff, Doris Scott, went to Edna’s Beauty Salon, which is owned by the defendant Edna James, and requested a “hair relaxer” treatment. The treatment was provided by Ms. James’ codefendant, Sylvia Summer, who was employed at the salon. Ms. Scott testified…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Poulnot v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- Boris S. Browzin v. Catholic University of America, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1975
- Selma, Rome & Dalton Railroad v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Phillips v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
- Boone County v. Burlington & Missouri River RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.