281 A.3d 568
D.C.2022Background
- Appellant Marjorie Atkinson alleges an MPD unmarked vehicle struck her car while she was parking, causing serious injury and property damage.
- The MPD vehicle carried officers and a robbery victim; it was traveling 10–15 mph without lights or sirens.
- Complaint alleges the MPD driver failed to look, veered into Atkinson’s lane, and did not correct course after she honked.
- Superior Court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim, concluding the vehicle was on an "emergency run" (triggering D.C. Code § 2-412) and that the conduct did not amount to gross negligence.
- On appeal, the D.C. Court of Appeals vacated and remanded, holding the emergency-run defense was premature on a motion to dismiss and that the gross-negligence claim was plausibly pleaded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the complaint is barred by the emergency-run rule (D.C. Code § 2-412) | Atkinson: complaint does not show the officer subjectively believed he must proceed expeditiously, so defense not established | District: facts show vehicle was responding to robbery and thus on an emergency run, limiting liability to gross negligence | Court: Reversed dismissal — complaint does not establish as a matter of law that an emergency run existed; the defense is affirmative and premature on a motion to dismiss |
| Whether the complaint sufficiently pleads gross negligence | Atkinson: allegations (failure to look, failure to correct after horn, veering into lane) plausibly show extreme disregard for safety | District: similar facts do not rise to gross negligence under prior decisions | Court: Reversed dismissal — on a motion to dismiss the allegations are sufficient to plausibly state a gross-negligence claim |
Key Cases Cited
- Grayson v. AT & T Corp., 15 A.3d 219 (D.C. 2011) (standard of review on motion to dismiss)
- Scott v. FedChoice Fed. Credit Union, 274 A.3d 318 (D.C. 2022) (plausibility pleading standard)
- Duggan v. District of Columbia, 884 A.2d 661 (D.C. 2005) (defines "emergency run" and requires operator's honest belief)
- Falconi-Sachs v. LPF Senate Square, LLC, 142 A.3d 550 (D.C. 2016) (plaintiff need not plead facts negating affirmative defenses at complaint stage)
- Dickson v. District of Columbia, 938 A.2d 688 (D.C. 2007) (summary judgment for District where officer testimony on subjective belief was undisputed)
- District of Columbia v. Walker, 689 A.2d 40 (D.C. 1997) (analysis of emergency-run/gross-negligence in pursuit context)
- Tillery v. District of Columbia, 227 A.3d 147 (D.C. 2020) (gross negligence requires extreme deviation; wanton or reckless disregard)
- Solers, Inc. v. Doe, 977 A.2d 941 (D.C. 2009) (pleading standards in D.C.; minimal requirements)
- District of Columbia v. Henderson, 710 A.2d 874 (D.C. 1998) (court reviewed evidentiary record on gross negligence rather than a pleading challenge)