Kieffer v. Capital Transit Co.

214 F.2d 241, 94 U.S. App. D.C. 95, 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 2683
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedApril 22, 1954
Docket11769
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 214 F.2d 241 (Kieffer v. Capital Transit Co.) 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
Kieffer v. Capital Transit Co., 214 F.2d 241, 94 U.S. App. D.C. 95, 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 2683 (D.C. Cir. 1954).

Opinion

*242 PER CURIAM.

In an action for damages alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the appellee, in connection with a fall of appellant in alighting from one of appellee’s buses, the District Court at the conclusion of appellant’s case directed a verdict in favor of appellee because of insufficient evidence of negligence. We affirm. The cause of the fall was left in such uncertainty at the conclusion of appellant’s case that to permit the jury to attribute the claimed injuries to the negligence of appel-lee would be too speculative to warrant submission of the issue to them.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Perrino v. D. C. Transit System, Inc.
218 A.2d 519 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1966)
Hryn v. Capital Transit Co.
116 A.2d 158 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1955)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
214 F.2d 241, 94 U.S. App. D.C. 95, 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 2683, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kieffer-v-capital-transit-co-cadc-1954.