Legal Opinion

Bullock v. Dahlstrom

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided April 4, 1946No. 360PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOOD, Associate Judge.

Plaintiff’s automobile and defendant’s taxicab were in a collision on Washington Circle. There is no question that plaintiff’s car was being operated in a proper manner and that the taxicab, which was proceeding in the wrong direction on the circle, was being operated in a negligent manner. However, at the time of the collision defendant was not in the taxicab and it was then being operated by a female Marine corporal. Her possession of the taxicab is explained by the following facts found by the trial judge.

The corporal had entered defendant’s taxicab as a passenger in…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Ross v. HartmanCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1943
  2. Schaff v. R. W. Claxton, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1944

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Frederick O. Gaither v. Charles R. Myers and American Motorist Insurance Co., a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1968
  2. Myers v. GaitherDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1967
  3. Lingefelt v. HannerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1960
  4. Lustbader v. Traders Delivery Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1949
  5. Tan Top Cab Company v. ShillerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1956

8 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