Case Name: Leon B. REID et al., Appellants, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellee
Court: District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: District of Columbia
Decision Date: 1978-08-30
Citations: 399 A.2d 1293
Docket Number: No. 11770
Parties: Leon B. REID et al., Appellants, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellee.
Judges: Before GALLAGHER and FERREN, Associate Judges, and MOULTRIE, Chief Judge, Superior Court of the District of Columbia.
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 399
Pages: 1293–1293

Head Matter:
Leon B. REID et al., Appellants, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Appellee.
No. 11770.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
Argued March 7, 1978.
Decided Aug. 30, 1978.
Robert E. Miller, Washington, D.C., for appellants.
Dennis McDaniel, Asst. Corp. Counsel, Washington, D.C., with whom John R. Risher, Jr., Corp. Counsel, Washington, D.C., at the time the case was briefed and argued, and Richard W. Barton, Deputy Corp. Counsel, Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for appellee.
Before GALLAGHER and FERREN, Associate Judges, and MOULTRIE, Chief Judge, Superior Court of the District of Columbia.
Sitting by designation pursuant to D.C.Code 1973, § ll-707(a).

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
The appellee, District of Columbia, has petitioned for rehearing, or, in the alternative, for rehearing en banc, claiming that the discussion of the collateral source rule is dicta and requesting that that portion of the division opinion be deleted. Specifically, the petition states:
The District did not adequately address the collateral source rule below, or on appeal, because, in its view, since Ms. Twitty had not received any Medicaid payments, it did not seem necessary for the Court to decide whether, if she had received such payments, they would have come from a collateral source.
We agree that our discussion of the collateral source rule was not necessary to the decision and that appellee's point, accordingly, is well taken. We therefore
ORDER that the following paragraphs of the division opinion shall be deleted: paragraph 6 (beginning "In their brief, . . ") through paragraph 24 (ending, " . pay the bills"). See 391 A.2d 776, 778-781 (1978). In all other respects the opinion shall stay the same. The case is reversed and remanded for a new trial.
So ordered.