Patricia Ann Hemphill v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
982 F.2d 572, 299 U.S. App. D.C. 184, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 450, 1993 WL 4924
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit·Decided January 15, 1993·No. 91-7112·Published·Cited by 11 cases
Opinions
It is the judgment of this court, in which all three judges concur, that the judgment of the district court be vacated and the case remanded for a new trial. As explained in the opinions of the three judges that follow, the “claims-minded-plaintiff” instruction given by the magistrate judge was improper.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Patricia Ann Hemphill v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 982 F.2d 572, 299 U.S. App. D.C. 184, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 450, 1993 WL 4924 (D.C. Cir. 1993).
982 F.2d 572 (Patricia Ann Hemphill v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Interstate Fire & Casualty Co. v. Washington Hospital Center Corp.
758 F.3d 378 (D.C. Circuit, 2014)
Interstate Fire & Casualty Co v. Washington Hospital Center Corp.
D.C. Circuit, 2014
Mines v. Capital Group Companies
District of Columbia, 2009
Tri-State Hospital Supply, Inc. v. United States
471 F. Supp. 2d 170 (District of Columbia, 2007)
Lewis v. Voss
770 A.2d 996 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2001)
Kim GASTINEAU, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. FLEET MORTGAGE CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee
137 F.3d 490 (Seventh Circuit, 1998)
Murphy v. Bonanno
663 A.2d 505 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1995)
Tanya Smalls v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
38 F.3d 609 (D.C. Circuit, 1994)
Wagschal v. Sea Ins. Co., Ltd.
861 F. Supp. 263 (S.D. New York, 1994)
Patricia Ann Hemphill v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
982 F.2d 572 (D.C. Circuit, 1993)