Legal Opinion
Giordano v. Interdonato
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided February 5, 1991No. 89-1378PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FARRELL, Associate Judge:
Many years ago the Supreme Court observed that, “At best [the] doctrine of election of remedies is a harsh, and now largely obsolete rule, the scope of which should not be extended.” Friederichsen v. Renard, 247 U.S. 207, 213, 38 S.Ct. 450, 452, 62 L.Ed. 1075 (1918). The principal question in this appeal is whether the trial judge correctly applied the doctrine so as to require plaintiff, before submission of the case to the jury, to elect between her separate claims of breach of fiduciary duty and breach of a subsequent agreement to devise property in settlement of…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Mathews v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Cartel Capital Corp. v. Fireco of New JerseySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1980
- Friederichsen v. RenardSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
- 1010 Potomac Associates v. Grocery Manufacturers of America, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1984
- Ajax Hardware Manufacturing Corporation v. Industrial Plants CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1977
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Bingham v. Goldberg. Marchesano. Kohlman. Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
- Bible Way Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ of Apostolic Faith of Washington v. BeardsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- MODERN MANAGEMENT CO. v. WilsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2010
- Noonan v. WilliamsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- Dean v. GarlandDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.