 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Allworth v. Howard Univ., No. 05-CV-24,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, January 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly granted summary judgment to a university in an action by an assistant professor (AP), alleging breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing due to the denial of her tenure application, as the university's decision was not arbitrary or capicious and was based on the faculty handbook.
|
|||||
| Butler v. United States, No. 02-CF-1268,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, January 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court should have conducted more extensive inquiry before accepting witness's claim of privilege, but failure to do so was harmless error. Any testimony the witness was able to offer would have put him in allegedly stolen car during the events in question, subjecting him to prosecution for unauthorized use of a vehicle as a passenger.
|
|||||
| In re Estate of Curseen v. Ingersoll, No. 05-CV-277,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, January 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a complaint filed by a decedent's estate and his widow was sufficient to meet the pleading requirements of D.C. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 8(a) by giving the law firm fair notice of the basis for their malpractice suit, the trial court erred in dismissing the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
|
|||||
| In re Estate of Walker, No. 01-PR-1098,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, January 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an action regarding the distribution of the proceeds in a joint savings account held by the decedent and her friend, because genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether the elements of "delivery" and "absolute disposition of the subject gift" were established, and credibility issues remained, summary judgment was inappropriate.
|
|||||
| Knight v. United States, No. 04-CO-223,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, January 12, 2006, * Decided* This case was originally decided in an unpublished Memorandum Opinion and Judgment. We now publish the opinion, with minor editorial revisions, having granted appellee's motion for publication.
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court's decision to dismiss an inmate's petition for a writ of habeas corpus was proper where the inmate was incarcerated in a federal facility, as the District of Columbia trial court lacked jurisdiction to even consider the petition pursuant to D.C. Code § 16-1901 (2001) because it was properly directed against the federal warden.
|
|||||
| McCoy v. United States, Nos. 03-CF-722 & 03-CF-1184,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, January 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Admission of defendant one's confession was not harmless error. As to the conspiracy, D.C. Code Ann. § 22-1805a (2001), none of the government's other witnesses were able to prove that defendant one agreed to the assault with a deadly weapon or performed any of the overt acts at issue. The evidence satisfying the elements came from the confession.
|
|||||
| Motor City Drive, L.L.C. v. Brennan Beer Gorman Monk Architects & Interiors, P.L.L.C., No. 04-CV-1331,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, January 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an owner agreed to arbitrate any claim, dispute, or other matter arising out of or related to its agreement with an architect, the fact that the architect was awarded money that it owed to a subcontractor did not mean that the arbitrator exceeded the scope of his authority under D.C. Code Ann. § 16-4311(a).
|
|||||
| Scarborough v. Winn Residential L.L.P./Atlantic Terrace Apts., No. 05-CV-207,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, January 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a tenant violated the lease to her HUD-subsidized residence that prohibited criminal activity on thereon, by possessing a loaded shotgun that had been used in a fatal shooting the previous day, she was not entitled to the notice and cure requirements under D.C. Code § 42-3505.01(b) (2001), but 42 U.S.C.S. § 1437f (d)(1)(B)(iii) controlled.
|
|||||
| Snyder v. George Wash. Univ., No. 02-CV-1395,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, January 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a patient's expert established, through his testimony, the national standard of care and a breach of that standard in the patient's medical malpractice action, and improperly-excluded deposition testimony of another expert established causation, a prima facie case of medical malpractice was shown; a directed verdict for a hospital was error.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
