Legal Opinion
Lee v. Jones
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided October 25, 1993No. 92-CV-372PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KING, Associate Judge:
Appellants Donald Lee and Diann Montgomery, plaintiffs in the trial court, appeal the grant of summary judgment in favor of trial court defendants Robert Jones (“Jones”) and Government Employees Insurance Company (“GEICO”). They contend that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because: (1) the statutory personal injury protection (“PIP”) provision requires a showing of “knowing, conscious and intelligent election of PIP benefits” by the injured person, in lieu of bringing suit for liability, which was a disputed material fact, and (2) appellants could…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Holland v. HannanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- Monroe v. ForemanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- Smith v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
- METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. JohnsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1976
- Viola Thomas v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1988
3Cited by10 opinions
- Kerrigan v. Britches of Georgetowne, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
- Sherman v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995
- Freeman v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2012
- Townsend v. WaldoDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
- In Re Estate of BurlesonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1999
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.