Legal Opinion
Meyer v. Capital Transit Co.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided May 21, 1943No. Nos. 71, 72PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HOOD, Associate Judge.
The actions below were for personal injuries and property damage caused by a street car striking an automobile owned and operated by the adult appellant with whom was riding her small child, the infant appellant. The cases were tried together before a jury and resulted in a verdict for the Transit Company in each case.
The main point urged on appeal is the alleged improper remarks of appellee’s counsel in his argument to the jury. Those remarks were: “We, the Capital Transit Company, do not want to cause injury to anyone. Accidents are unavoidable. Do you, members of the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Berger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Viereck v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Dunlop v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- New York Central Railroad v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Washington Times Co. v. BonnerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1936
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Psychiatric Institute of Washington v. AllenDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
- Beckman v. FarmerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- District of Columbia v. BethelDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- District Hauling & Construction Co. v. ArgerakisDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1943
- Ridilla v. KernsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1959
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.