District of Columbia v. Evans

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the doctrine has “no relevance” in a police shooting case in which plaintiff was injured directly by police officers
• explaining that the public duty doctrine \deals with the question whether public officials have a duty to protect individual members of the general public against harm from third parties or other independent sources\
• explaining that the public duty doctrine “deals with the question whether public officials have a duty to protect individual members of the general public against harm from third parties or other independent sources”
• upholding jury finding of negligent infliction of emotional distress where police officers shot plaintiff’s son in her presence
• police officers who shot plaintiffs son were not liable for assault and battery, but could still be held liable for negligence
• plaintiff testified that she heard the police officer tell her son to “drop it” and then saw the officer shoot him; she testified that her son was unarmed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).