Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Citation
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Parent Document
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Jurisdiction
- DC (municipal)
- Effective Date
- 2005-09-08
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2081609/childs-v-purll/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (121)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- Childs v. Purll, 882 A.2d 227 (2005)
- § 400
- § 400
- § 400
- § 400
- § 400
- § 400
- § 400
- § 400
- § 400
- § 400
- § 400
- § 400
- § 400
- § 17
- § 17
- § 17
- § 17
- § 17
- § 17
- § 17
- § 17
- § 17
- § 17
- § 17
- § 17
- § 17
- § 17
Full Text
701 charsThe trial court erred in not evaluating the negligence claims against Lawrence, David and Robert Willoughby in accordance with the foregoing legal standards. We think the prudent course is not to attempt to apply those standards ourselves, but instead to remand the case for the trial court to do so in the first instance. It is true that, “[a]s a reviewing court, we are not limited to reviewing the legal adequacy of the grounds the trial court relied on for its ruling; if there is an alternative basis that dictates the same result, a correct judgment must be affirmed on appeal.” Kerrigan v. Britches of Georgetowne, Inc., 705 A.2d 624, 628 (D.C.1997) (citing, inter alia, Marinopoliski v. Irish,