 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| District of Columbia v. Beretta, U.S.A., Corp., No. 03-CV-24, No. 03-CV-38,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, April 29, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although the District of Columbia and nine individuals failed to state negligence or public nuisance claims against weapons manufacturers, individuals could pursue their strict liability claims and District could pursue limited subrogation claim.
|
|||||
| In re Cohen, No. 02-BG-863,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, April 29, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A supervisory attorney was suspended from the practice of law for 30 days for violating a DC bar rule by failing to become aware and prevent violations of the bar rules by a junior attorney who was representing a client in a trademark case.
|
|||||
| Smith v. United States, No. 02-CF-909,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, April 29, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant did not preserve a claim under the Misdemeanor Jury Trial Act of 2002, which became effective the day before the charges were submitted to the jury, the trial court did not err in failing to charge the jury on a marijuana charge.
|
|||||
| Wagner v. Sellinger, No. 99-CV-788,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, April 29, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a legal malpractice suit, summary judgment was erroneously granted to defendants on the ground that the statute of limitations had run using the date counsel was terminated where the limitations period did not start until the harm was discovered.
|
|||||
| Davis v. United States, No. 98-CF-273,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, May 6, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Admission into evidence of accomplice's confession to police at defendant's perjury trial violated defendant's U.S. Const. amend. VI rights because he was afforded no opportunity to cross-examine. The error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
|
|||||
| Dyson v. United States, No. 02-CF-500,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, May 6, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A defendant's conviction of first-degree sexual abuse was upheld where the District of Columbia trial court was found to have had territorial jurisdiction over the matter where the use of force by defendant occurred in the District.
|
|||||
| Garcia v. United States, No. 00-CF-1362,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, May 6, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court rejected defendant's claim that jury which heard charge alleging that he killed pedestrian while driving a bus was unfairly persuaded to find him guilty of negligent homicide because it was also instructed on involuntary manslaughter.
|
|||||
| In re Shein, No. 02-BG-1220,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, May 6, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After an attorney consented to indefinite suspension in Maryland, District of Columbia court imposed identical reciprocal discipline. Attorney could apply for reinstatement after being reinstated in Maryland or after five years, whichever came first.
|
|||||
| Thompson v. D.C. Dep't of Empl. Servs., No. 03-AA-642,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, May 6, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A petition for review of an order denying a claim for workers' compensation benefits was properly denied as untimely where the claimant raised an argument for the first time on appeal, which was not sufficiently preserved for review.
|
|||||
| Washkoviak v. Sallie Mae, No. 03-CV-344,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, May 6, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiffs claiming a failure to disclose and misrepresentations regarding late fees collected on student loans were granted leave to amend their complaint to state a cause of action under District of Columbia law.
|
|||||
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. |
