Sinai v. Polinger Co.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1ConcurrenceNebeker, Associate Judge
Appellants raise objections to, among other things, the trial court’s instructions on assumption of the risk and contributory negligence. It is well settled that appellants bear the burden of affirmatively establishing prejudicial error. Goldstein v. Kennedy, 134 A.2d 580, 581 (D.C.1957); D.C.Code § 11-721(e) (1981). In this case, however, the Sinais are unable to demonstrate prejudice, assuming error, as the jury returned a general verdict. Despite this, the majority assumes the jury did reach the questions of contributory negligence and assumption of the risk. It then goes to great lengths…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Lewis v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- Lynch v. Meridian Hill Studio Apts., Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1985
- Bartak v. Bell-Galyardt & Wells, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1980
- Karl Ohliger v. United States of America and Oscar ReddingCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1962
- Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. HillDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1969
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.