Legal Opinion
Strickland v. Pinder
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided May 25, 2006No. 04-CV-1508PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WASHINGTON, Chief Judge:
Appellant seeks review of the trial court’s October 20, 2002 grant of the defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the basis that the plaintiffs expert failed to both establish a national standard of care and provide, as a matter of law, sufficient basis for a reasonable juror to find that any alleged breach of the duty of care by the defendants had proximately caused the death of the decedent. The appellant contends that the trial court erred in finding: 1) that the appellant’s expert failed to establish a national standard of care; and 2) that the appellees did not waive…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Morrison v. MacNamaraDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- Meek v. ShepardDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1984
- Majeska v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2002
- Travers v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- Pazmino v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Hill v. Medlantic Health Care GroupDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
- Convit v. WilsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2009
- Burton v. United StatesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2009
- Coulter v. Gerald Family Care, P.C.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2009
- Rhodes v. United StatesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.