Sherman v. District of Columbia

How courts have described this case

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

• reversing a grant of summary judgment because the moving party did not meet its burden of proving that no reasonable juror could find against it
• reversing a grant of summary judgment because the moving party did not meet its burden of proving that no reasonable juror could find against it
• stating “[p]roof that the District had notice of the defective condition is irrelevant here, where liability is premised on the primary negligence of the District’s agent”
• “Proof that the District had notice of the defective condition [an unsecured water meter cover] is irrelevant here, where liability is premised on the primary negligence of the District’s agent” in creating the unsafe condition

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).