Legal Opinion
Estep v. Construction General, Inc.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided July 18, 1988No. 85-543PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FERREN, Associate Judge:
Samuel Estep was injured in 1979 while working for Krick Commercial, Inc. He received compensation from Krick under the District of Columbia Workmen’s Compensation Act of 1928, D.C.Code § 36-301 et seq. (1973), which applied to injuries occurring before mid-1982. Estep and his wife then brought a negligence action against the general contractor on the project, Construction General, Inc., which had neither obtained workers compensation insurance for Krick’s employees nor paid any part of the compensation to Estep. The trial court granted Construction General’s motion…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Crowell v. BensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Whalen v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- M. A. P. v. RyanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1971
- Pernell v. Southall RealtySupreme Court of the United States · 1974
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Banks v. International Rental & Leasing Corp.Supreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 2011
- Thomas v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- United States v. AlstonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- Railco Multi-Construction Co. v. GardnerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1989
- DeShazo v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.