Robinson 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 WMATA's policy that a bus may be operated while passengers are standing is subject to sovereign immunity, making WMATA immune from suit on this theory
• holding that a bus operator who did not follow WMATA's safety rules did not qualify for sovereign immunity
• holding that a bus operator who did not follow WMATA’s safety rules did not qualify for sovereign immunity
• holding that plaintiff’s claims regarding bus driver’s failure to follow safety directives contained in WMATA’s Standard Operating Procedures were not barred by sovereign immunity
• explaining sovereign immunity barred challenge to sufficiency of WMATA’s standard operating procedures governing bus safety, but allowed challenge premised on failure to comply with mandatory requirements specified within them
• “[T]he [plaintiffs standard operating procedures], without more, are insufficient to establish a national standard of care.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).