Notable Decisions

Settlements are private. Opinions are not. These are the decisions our lawyers argued and the courts published.

Frankeny v. District Hospital Partners, LP, 225 A.3d 999 (D.C. 2020)

District of Columbia Court of Appeals — published

Jacob Lebowitz argued this appeal as sole counsel for the appellant and won a decision that changed District of Columbia consumer law.

Our client alleged she had consented to surgery on the understanding that the board-certified specialist who recommended it would perform it, and that a resident performed the operation instead without any disclosure. Rather than plead the case as medical negligence, we brought it under the Consumer Protection Procedures Act.

The Court of Appeals vacated summary judgment for the hospital and held two things: that a CPPA plaintiff need not prove a misrepresentation was intentional under D.C. Code § 28-3904(a) and (d), and that there is no “entrepreneurial nexus” requirement for CPPA claims against medical providers — expressly declining to follow the contrary federal line of authority. It further held that no different burden of proof applies to consumer claims against medical service providers.

The decision is binding precedent in the District of Columbia and the Court of Appeals continues to cite it.

Frankeny — the ruling that got there

Superior Court of the District of Columbia — motion to dismiss denied

Before the appeal, the defendants moved to dismiss on the ground that a consumer protection claim cannot reach a medical provider at all. The Superior Court denied the motion in a reasoned opinion, holding that the alleged misrepresentation went to which doctor would perform the surgery — the inducement to purchase the service — rather than to the physician's medical competency, and therefore stated a viable claim. The hospital's companion motion for summary judgment was denied because it briefed only informed-consent law and offered no authority at all on consumer protection liability.

Bunting v. District of Columbia CVS Pharmacy, LLC, No. 24-7124 (D.C. Cir. 2026)

United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit — published

Jacob Lebowitz argued and briefed the appeal as sole counsel for the plaintiffs and obtained reversal of summary judgment against a national retailer.

The trial court had ended the case on the ground that our expert tested the walkway with the wrong substance. The D.C. Circuit held that our expert's testimony — together with the defense expert's own field notes recording a coefficient of friction of 0.49 against a stipulated standard of care of 0.50 — created a genuine issue of fact for a jury. The case returns to the district court for trial.

Also of record

Our lawyers have tried cases to verdict and have briefed and argued matters in the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, and the United States District Courts for the District of Columbia, Maryland, and the Eastern District of Virginia.

Call (202) 524-0123 · Contact us → · See our verdicts & settlements →