Washington Gas Light Co. v. Kerlin

211 F.2d 649, 94 U.S. App. D.C. 39, 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 2599
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit·Decided April 1, 1954·No. 11829_1·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The principal ground urged by appellant for reversal of the judgment rendered against it for personal injuries to appellee is that the trial court erred in submitting the case to the jury under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. We think this was not error for the reasons cited by the trial court in overruling appellant’s motion for a new trial, etc. 1 And since we do not agree with appellant’s additional contention that there was insufficient evidence that the alleged events were the proximate cause of appellee’s total deafness, the judgment below is

Affirmed.

1

. Kerlin v. Washington Gas Light Co., D.C.D.C.1953, 110 F.Supp. 487.

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

Washington Gas Light Co. v. Kerlin, 211 F.2d 649, 94 U.S. App. D.C. 39, 1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 2599 (D.C. Cir. 1954).

211 F.2d 649 (Washington Gas Light Co. v. Kerlin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Krebs v. Corrigan
321 A.2d 558 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1974)
Powers v. Coates
203 A.2d 425 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1964)
Wilson v. Spencer
127 A.2d 840 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1956)