Legal Opinion
D. C. Transit System, Inc. v. Franklin
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided January 31, 1961No. 2642PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
QUINN, Associate Judge.
This is the second of two cases argued before this court on the same day questioning the propriety of Municipal Court orders under Rule 41(a) (2). 1 As in Raney v. D. C. Transit System, Inc., 2 plaintiff, appellee here, was injured on a streetcar and brought suit for $3,000, the Municipal Court’s jurisdictional limit. Discovering later that such an amount would not provide full compensation, she filed a motion under Rule 41(a) (2) requesting a dismissal so that she might seek larger damages in the United States District Court. This appeal challenges the granting of that…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Harvey Aluminum, Inc. v. American Cyanamid Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1953
- Ockert v. Union Barge Line Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1951
- Raney v. D. C. Transit System, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1960
- Adams v. DavisDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1946
3Cited by7 opinions
- Brown v. CarrDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
- Thoubboron v. Ford Motor Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
- Bernay v. SalesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1981
- D.C. Rent-A-Car Co. v. CochranDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- Dorchester House Associates Ltd. Partnership v. District of Columbia Rental Housing CommissionDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2006
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.