District of Columbia, May, 2005, State Case law

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!

State Courts - District of Columbia - May 26 - June 7, 2005

In re Demos, No. 00-BG-1274, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, May 26, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Appellate court ordered attorney be disbarred in District of Columbia based on false statements he made to get admitted to Arizona federal trial court, resulting in his name being stricken from roll of attorneys in that court; D.C. Bar. R. XI, ? 11(c) presumption that sanction be same did not mean harsher sanction of disbarment was not justified.

Search Cases for Free

In re Vural, No. 03-BG-1259, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, May 26, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Where neither attorney nor bar counsel had taken exception to recommended discipline by a professional responsibility board for an attorney's misconduct in Maryland, court imposed reciprocal discipline on attorney in form of one year and 60 day suspension to be stayed after 60 days if attorney agreed to practice law under watch of another attorney.

Search Cases for Free

Jung v. George Washington Univ., No. 99-CV-1087, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, May 26, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Judgment as a matter of law was properly entered in a university's favor on a student's claim under the District of Columbia Human Rights Act, D.C. Code Ann. ? 2-1402.61(a) (2001), that he failed an exam required for his degree in retaliation for a prior discrimination suit because there was no evidence that the graders knew about the prior suit.

Search Cases for Free

Bennett v. United States, No. 00-CF-1653, F3245-98, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, June 2, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: There was no abuse of discretion or denial of Sixth Amendment rights to confrontation and to present a defense in trial court's decision to limit cross-examination and preclude defense introduction of expert evidence regarding witness's paranoid schizophrenia diagnosis where any symptoms had occurred years earlier and witness was not delusional.

Search Cases for Free

Matthews v. District of Columbia, No. 02-CV-38, CA-3036-01, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, June 2, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: A trial court erred by dismissing a mother's complaint seeking a declaration of parentage to resolve the issue of whether her daughter was entitled to survivor benefits due to the death of a firefighter because the trial court was statutorily designated under D.C. Code Ann. ? 16-909 to resolve paternity issues.

Search Cases for Free

Packheiser v. Miller, No. 04-CV-67, CA-4182-03, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, June 2, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: A trial court abused its discretion by mechanically denying a patient's D.C. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 41(b) motion to vacate the dismissal of her medical malpractice suit against a doctor for failure to serve process within the time requirements of D.C. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 4(m) without making any findings as to the reasons for failing to comply.

Search Cases for Free

White v. Sargent, Nos. 03-PR-1017, 04-PR-553, TR-30-01, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, June 2, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Where analysis of factors including judicial findings regarding decedent settlor's practice of lying about assets in domestic relations proceedings and settlor's belief that death could occur at any time indicated trust was created to evade widow's exercise of D.C. Code Ann. ? 19-113 (2001) rights, the trust was void.

Search Cases for Free

United States v. Graves, Case No. F 1812-82, F 4914-81, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, CRIMINAL DIVISION - SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS BRANCH, June 7, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Court corrected an illegal sentence because the court found that defendant had recovered sufficiently to be conditionally released from a hospital to serve his sentence. The court credited time against defendant's prison term for the time of commitment in the hospital that was extended by the illegal sentence.

Search Cases for Free

Communities Portal