Legal Opinion
Barros v. Government Employees Insurance
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided February 2, 2015No. Civil Action No. 2013-0669PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Thomas F. Hogan Senior United States District Judge
This is the second time the Court has been asked to determine the legal viability of this lawsuit. Antonio Barros and Jeffrey Styles (collectively “the plaintiffs”) allege in their Amended Complaint that Government Employees Insurance Company, Inc. (“GEICO” or “the defendant”) 1 breached an insurance contract and implied covenant of good faith by failing to adequately compensate the plaintiffs for injuries and damages they incurred in a vehicle collision. 2 Pending before the Court are (1) Defendant GEICO’s Motion to Dismiss…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Papasan v. AllainSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Venture Associates Corporation, a Tennessee Corporation v. Zenith Data Systems Corporation, a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1993
- David Nathaniel Jackson v. Malcolm Beech David Nathaniel Jackson v. Malcolm BeechCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Molock v. Whole Foods Mkt., Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
- Dehope v. Jones Lang Lasalle Americas, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2025
- Molock v. Whole Foods Market, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2018