Legal Opinion
National Organization for Women v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided September 18, 1987No. 86-15PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BELSON, Associate Judge:
The two individual appellants are women who purchased health insurance policies at rates higher than those charged men of the same age and medical history. Appellee Mutual of Omaha sold those policies to the individual appellants, who assert that by charging them the higher rates Mutual of Omaha violated the District of Columbia Human Rights Act, D.C.Code §§ 1-2501 to 1-2557 (1987). The National Organization for Women, a nationwide membership organization, joined the individual appellants in their suit and in this appeal. Because we disagree with appellants’ contention…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Sedima, S. P. R. L. v. Imrex Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Bob Jones University v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- City of Los Angeles Department of Water v. ManhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- United States v. StewartSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- United States Parole Commission v. NobleDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
- District of Columbia v. MorrisseyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995
- Washington Automotive Co. v. 1828 L Street AssociatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2006
- National Fair Housing Alliance v. Travelers Indemnity CompanyDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2017
- Evans v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.