LexisNexis
  
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!

Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!

While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.


   State Courts - District of Columbia - April - December, 2002

  
Card v. United States, No. 94-CF-754, No. 94-CF-801, No. 94-CF-1147, F7682-91, F4437-92, F6601-92., DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, April 29, 2002, Filed
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
In re Te.L., N-962-01, SF 211532, N-963-01, SF 211533, N-964-01, SF 211530, N-965-01, SF 211531, N-1297-01, SF 217538, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, FAMILY COURT, May 8, 2002, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: The abuse the parents inflicted on an unrelated child placed their children, who remained in their home, in imminent danger of abuse, thus depriving them of proper parental care and control under D.C. Code Ann. § 16-2301(9)(B). Therefore, the children were adjudicated as neglected.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Morton v. Burns, Civil Action No. 01 CA 6368, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, CIVIL DIVISION, May 28, 2002, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Court denied prison corporation's motion to dismiss inmate's suit on ground of forum non conveniens. As prison where inmate was allegedly assaulted was in Arizona, inmate was domiciled in District of Columbia domiciliary, and had been moved to a Colorado prison, corporation failed to show that District of Columbia was seriously inconvenient forum.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Sanchez-Rengifo v. United States, Nos. 98-CF-995 & 01-CO-580, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, September 12, 2002, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Because defendant decided to commit different sex acts on his victim over a two-hour period, defendant's conduct did not merge into one offense, and the Double Jeopardy Clause did not bar defendant's convictions for committing multiple offenses.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Solomon v. Supreme Court of Fla., No. 99-CV-1257, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, September 12, 2002, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Where a lawyer did not show that Florida Bar members acted outside the scope of their official duties when they made statements about the lawyer in the District of Columbia, the trial court did not err in dismissing the defamation complaint.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
B.B. v. A.C. (In re T.C.), Docket No. N-1314-99, Social File No. 213203 Consolidated with Case No. DR-1659-01c, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, FAMILY COURT, November 25, 2002, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Where the mother's lack of adequate supervision had resulted in the death of one of her children and in the second-degree burns to another, it was in the child's best interest under D.C. Code Ann. § 16-2353(a), (b) to award permanent custody to the great-grandmother. The great-grandmother provided a stable, loving, and structured home.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
United States v. Jones, Docket No. F-11282-87, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, CRIMINAL DIVISION, December 26, 2002, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Under writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum, inmate was "on loan" to the District of Columbia and bureau of prisons retained jurisdiction over administration of his sentence. Thus, bureau director had authority to make a no further benefit finding. Director clearly articulated in written notification specific reasons for making the finding.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Ex parte P. C. L., Adoption Case No. A-474-'00 CONSOLIDATED WITH, Adoption Case No. A-043-'01, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, FAMILY COURT, December 27, 2002, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Parents consented under D.C. Code Ann. § 16-304 to mother's aunt and uncle's, but not to foster parent's, petition to adopt their four-year-old child. Based on D.C. Code Ann. § 16-2353(b)(2) factors, court granted foster parent's petition based on clear and convincing evidence of child's best interests and fact that she was more qualified to adopt.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
In re W.T.L., No. 00-FS-1403, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, December 31, 2002, Decided ** The decision in this case was originally released as a Memorandum Opinion and Judgment on December 31, 2002. It is now being published by direction of the court.
View this case - free  

Overview: Where a mother was homeless, did not visit or provide for a minor child, and was chemically addicted, and where a caretaker intended to discontinue caring for the child, the evidence was sufficient to support a neglect finding.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Back to Top
  

 www.lexisnexis.com  |  About LexisNexis  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Customer Support  |  Contact Us
  Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.