Legal Opinion
Chadbourne v. Kappaz
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided August 23, 2001No. 98-CV-1672PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WASHINGTON, Associate Judge:
The principal issue presented on appeal is whether the trial court erred in giving a jury instruction that did not require the jury to find that violation of the District of Columbia “leash law” statute is negligence as a matter of law. We affirm.
I
This appeal arises from an incident occurring on the morning of April 16, 1995, in which appellant, James Chadbourne, was injured when he tried to separate the dog he was walking from the dog of appel-lees, George and Amarie Kappaz. Amarie Kappaz had arisen early that morning to fix breakfast. At some point during that…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Joy v. Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1993
- Ceco Corp. v. ColemanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
- Rong Yao Zhou v. Jennifer Mall Restaurant, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
- Harrison Richardson v. Thomas E. GregoryCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1960
- Lewis v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Childs v. PurllDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- Night and Day Management, LLC v. Thomas M. Butler & Thomas M. Butler v. Night and Day Management, LLCDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2014
- Donna Ellis v. C. R. Bard, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2002
- Campbell-Crane & Associates, Inc. v. StamenkovicDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2012
- Shi Mui Liu v. AllenDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2006
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.