District of Columbia, June, 2006, 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 - June 1 - June 8, 2006

In re A.G., Nos. 04-FS-451 and 04-FS-739, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, June 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Due process did not require clear and convincing evidence to award a child's permanent guardianship, under D.C. Code ? 16-2388(f), and a preponderance of the evidence sufficed, as not all of a father's parental rights in the child were terminated. Not obtaining the child's opinion and not specifying the father's visitation did not abuse discretion.

Search Cases for Free

In re Thabault, No. 06-BG-456, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, June 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free

Search Cases for Free

Pellerin v. 1915 16th St., 03-CV-1295, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, June 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: In a housing cooperative's suit with a deceased member's personal representative, a trial court had to find if the representative could first raise a claim in a joint pretrial statement, without amending her complaint, and had to say how it found attorney's fees awarded to the cooperative, which could only include fees to recover the member's fees.

Search Cases for Free

Tolu v. District of Columbia, No. 05-TX-92, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, June 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Taxpayers trying to invalidate a tax assessment not accounting for lead in their water pipes showed no exception to D.C. Code ? 47-3307 (2001), barring suits to enjoin tax collecting, as it could not be said the government could not prevail, as it was not shown assessors knew of the lead on the assessment date, and the taxpayers had a legal remedy.

Search Cases for Free

Bobb v. Howard Univ. Hosp., No. 05-AA-768, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, June 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: In an unemployment insurance case, it was error to dismiss an administrative appeal as untimely filed under D.C. Code ? 51-111(b). There was no proof that the agency's decision had been mailed to the claimant in 2004, as a certificate of service was unsigned and the record was devoid of any explanation of the agency's internal mailing process.

Search Cases for Free

Brown v. United States, No. 04-CO-1250, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, June 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: A probation revocation, under D.C. Code ? 24-304 (2001) plainly erred as defendant did not have due process as (1) he had no notice of certain violations, (2) his claim that he was homeless was not explored, nor were efforts to pay a fine or revocation alternatives examined, and (3) the trial court did not adequately state its basis for revocation.

Search Cases for Free

In re Willingham, No. 05-BG-44, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, June 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: When an attorney was disbarred in another jurisdiction and did not participate in reciprocal discipline proceedings, under D.C. Bar R. XI, ? 11(f), seeking disbarment, he was disbarred as a rebuttable presumption that the same discipline should be imposed was not rebutted, and no obvious miscarriage of justice would result from the same discipline.

Search Cases for Free

Kidd Int'l Home Care, Inc. v. Dallas, No. 05-AA-130, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, June 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: When an agency decision awarding an employee unemployment compensation was administratively affirmed due to the employer's failure to timely appeal, evidence that notice of the decision was sent to the employer was insufficient, under D.C. Code ? 51-111(b) (2001), because that evidence consisted of the words "dated and mailed," followed by a date.

Search Cases for Free

Van Kuhn v. United States, Nos. 99-CF-1292, 00-CF-1513, 01-CO-145 & 05-CO-335, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, June 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Defense counsel was not ineffective for arguing, over defendant's objection, a theory defendant did not testify to, as, after consulting defendant, defense strategy was up to counsel's judgment, under D.C. R. Prof. Conduct 1.2(a), and the theory was objectively reasonable. Severance was not required as defendants' defenses were not irreconcilable.

Search Cases for Free

Washkoviak v. Sallie Mae, No. 05-CV-63, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, June 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: In a suit against the Student Loan Marketing Association, facts outside of the complaint were wrongly considered in ruling on a motion under D.C. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) to find operations were moved outside the District of Columbia. Accepting the complaint as true, it was unclear Wisconsin law, rather than District of Columbia law, applied.

Search Cases for Free

Communities Portal