Souci v. William C. Smith Co.

2 Citing cases

  1. Johnson v. District of Columbia

    Civil Action No. 03-2548 (GK) (D.D.C. Aug. 30, 2006)   Cited 5 times
    Describing the exception to the public duty doctrine as "narrow"

    The plaintiff must establish: first, that defendant owed a legal duty of care; second, that defendant breached that duty; and, third, that plaintiff "sustained harm as a proximate result of the defendant's breach." Souci v. William C. Smith Co., 763 A.2d 96, 99 (D.C. 2000). No negligence claim can lie in cases where the defendant owes no duty of care to the plaintiff.

  2. Robinson v. Samuel C. Boyd Son, Inc.

    822 A.2d 1093 (D.C. 2003)   Cited 6 times

    In addition, while reaffirming that a tenant cannot recover damages for real property, we have held that the legal occupier of the premises has standing to sue for injuries personal to her or resulting from negligence which caused the "loss of use and enjoyment" of personal property. See Souci v. William C. Smith Co., 763 A.2d 96, 100 (D.C. 2000). With regard to a tenant's suit for negligence, "[t]he duty to safeguard that probable user's interests can grow out of the common law and need not be based on a contract and nothing else."