Lewis v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that no negligence per se instruction was warranted in a case in which plaintiffs alleged a violation of a building code provision requiring that \neighboring property and structures ... shall be sufficiently supported\ while construction was underway
• holding that no negligence per se instruction was warranted in a case in which plaintiffs alleged a violation of a building code provision requiring that “neighboring property and structures ... shall be sufficiently supported” while construction was underway
• “The principal may ratify [an agent’s] act expressly or impliedly, by conduct inconsistent with any other hypothesis.”
• violation of a safety standard is evidence of negligence, not negligence per se
• principal’s prior actions may give rise to reasonable inference that agent has present authority
• “The principal may ratify the act expressly or impliedly, by conduct inconsistent with any other hypothesis, and once he has done so he is bound by the agent’s act nunc pro tunc.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).