Porter v. Conrad
This text of 196 F.2d 240 (Porter v. Conrad) 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.
Opinion
This appeal was allowed to review the application by the Municipal Court of Appeals of our decisions in Rosenberg v. Murray,1 and Hiscox v. Jackson2 in determining the limited circumstances under which t-he presumption of consent under the District of Columbia Owners’ Financial Responsibility Act, D.C.Code § 40-403 (1940), may be overcome as a matter of law. Upon our review of this case, we conclude that the Municipal Court of Appeals correctly stated and applied the governing principles laid down by this court.
We therefore adopt the opinion of the Municipal Court of Appeals, reported in 1951, 79 A.2d 777, in affirming its judgment herein.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
196 F.2d 240, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/porter-v-conrad-cadc-1952.