J. H. Deveau and Son, Inc. v. William R. Ott, Jr.

D.C. Circuit

J. H. Deveau and Son, Inc. v. William R. Ott, Jr.

317 F.2d 138, 115 U.S. App. D.C. 74, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 6144

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedFebruary 14, 1963

Docket17191_1

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 317 F.2d 138 (J. H. Deveau and Son, Inc. v. William R. Ott, Jr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

J. H. Deveau and Son, Inc. v. William R. Ott, Jr., 317 F.2d 138, 115 U.S. App. D.C. 74, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 6144 (D.C. Cir. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from judgments of the District Court in a personal injury case. The action was brought by the infant appellee (plaintiff) for personal injuries, and by his father (co-plaintiff) for medical expenses incurred. The defendants were Washington Gas Light Company, a public utility, and J. H. De-Veau & Son, Inc., a corporation engaged in making repairs for the utility. The damages were alleged to have been incurred by the minor plaintiff, a child 3% years old, by his being burned by an open flame of a flare-pot set in the street as a warning of a barricade or excavation.

At the conclusion of the plaintiff’s case, and at the conclusion of all the evidence, motions on behalf of the defendants were made for a directed ver *139 diet. The motion was granted on behalf of the public utility, but denied insofar as DeVeau was concerned. 1 The opinion of the trial court is reported at 205 F. Supp. 815 (1962), sub nom. Ott v. Washington Gas Light Co. The case against DeVeau was submitted to the jury, which returned verdicts in favor of the plaintiffs, and judgments were entered thereon. This appeal followed.

We are in general agreement with the opinion of the trial judge and, on the basis of his reasoning therein, affirm the judgments.

Affirmed.

1

. No appeal was taken by the plaintiffs from the judgment in favor of Washington Gas Light Company.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from judgments of the District Court in a personal injury case. The action was brought by the infant appellee (plaintiff) for personal injuries, and by his father (co-plaintiff) for medical expenses incurred. The defendants were Washington Gas Light Company, a public utility, and J. H. De-Veau & Son, Inc., a corporation engaged in making repairs for the utility. The damages were alleged to have been incurred by the minor plaintiff, a child 3% years old, by his being burned by an open flame of a flare-pot set in the street as a warning of a barricade or excavation.

At the conclusion of the plaintiff’s case, and at the conclusion of all the evidence, motions on behalf of the defendants were made for a directed ver *139 diet. The motion was granted on behalf of the public utility, but denied insofar as DeVeau was concerned. 1 The opinion of the trial court is reported at 205 F. Supp. 815 (1962), sub nom. Ott v. Washington Gas Light Co. The case against DeVeau was submitted to the jury, which returned verdicts in favor of the plaintiffs, and judgments were entered thereon. This appeal followed.

We are in general agreement with the opinion of the trial judge and, on the basis of his reasoning therein, affirm the judgments.

Affirmed.

1

. No appeal was taken by the plaintiffs from the judgment in favor of Washington Gas Light Company.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

317 F.2d 138, 115 U.S. App. D.C. 74, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 6144, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-h-deveau-and-son-inc-v-william-r-ott-jr-cadc-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack