Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Gilles v. Ware

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided October 6, 1992No. 89-CV-1436Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partFerren, Associate Judge

For the reasons that follow, in particular in Part IV., I would reverse the grant of summary judgment and remand the case for trial.

I

A

Appellant Gilíes appeals from a summary judgment rejecting his constitutional, civil rights, and negligence claims on the ground that they were barred by the doctrine of res judicata (claim preclusion). Appellant’s suit arose out of appellee Ware’s allegedly negligent placement of 44 points on appellant’s driver’s record, resulting in the wrongful suspension of his license and his ultimate loss of livelihood as a taxicab driver. The issues on appeal are (1)…

2Cases cited59 opinions

  1. United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Parratt v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. Baker v. McCollanSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. Hagans v. LavineSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  5. Commissioner v. SunnenSupreme Court of the United States · 1948

54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API