 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| In re D.B., Nos. 04-FS-1043 & 04-FS-1044,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, July 28, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: D.C. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 6(e) applied to motions for review filed in the trial court under D.C. Super. Ct. Fam. Div. R. D(e), and, thus, biological mother's motion to review magistrate judge's ruling was timely filed; however, guardianship order placing child with grandparents did not effectively terminate biological mother's visitation rights.
|
|||||
| Rorie v. United States, Nos. 96-CF-363 and 03-CO-949,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, July 28, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for voluntary manslaughter while armed was reversed, and his case was remanded for a new trial because the trial court erred in giving a criminal jury instruction relating to defendant as the aggressor or as the person who provoked the conflict upon himself, and the error was not harmless.
|
|||||
| In re S. W., N-129-05, XREF NO. 2972293, N-130-05, XREF NO. 2972295,
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, FAMILY COURT, July 29, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State's petition to find the children of a deceased mother to be neglected pursuant to D.C. Code ¿ 16-2301 was denied; the finding of neglect could not be based solely on the mother's death, and the evidence indicated that the mother took good care of the children and that relatives had volunteered to care for them after the mother's death.
|
|||||
| Breezevale Ltd. v. Dickinson, Nos. 03-CV-615 & 03-CV-634,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 4, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where clear and convincing evidence existed showing that a company knowingly relied on forged documents as a basis for a legal malpractice action, the dismissal of the case was upheld on appeal, though a separate punitive award of $ 1 million was vacated as excessive since a jury verdict and an award of attorneys' fees was granted.
|
|||||
| Burke v. Md. Auto Ins. Fund, No. 03-CV-1445,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 4, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since insureds failed to show their collision involved an uninsured vehicle, they failed to make a prima facie case to prevent insurer's motion for directed verdict. Insureds did not show the other car was not insured as required by D.C. Code Ann. ¿ 31-2406(f)(1)(A) or that they could not identify the other car as required by ¿ 31-2406(f)(1)(C).
|
|||||
| Burns v. United States, No. 04-CO-183, M-1009-03,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 4, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although the government's statement in opposition to an arrestee's D.C. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 118 (2004) affidavit (to seal the records of a previous arrest) was insufficient, the trial court properly summarily denied the request because a hearing would not result in evidence sufficient to meet the required clear and convincing standard.
|
|||||
| Jones v. United States, No. 01-CF-936,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 4, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a witness identified defendant five days after two murders in a second photo array, an appellate court upheld the photo identification procedure as reliable and properly admissible because the first array showed a heavier defendant than the second and was not unduly suggestive.
|
|||||
| Lyles v. United States, No. 01-CF-1513,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 4, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Handwritten notes taken by police when interviewing an auto theft victim in Maryland were never in the possession of District of Columbia government, which prosecuted defendant when car was later found in his possession there, so they were not Jencks Act, 18 U.S.C.S. ¿ 3500, materials.
|
|||||
| Powell v. United States, No. 00-CF-1618,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 4, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The government's failure to disclose the sex kit test results did not amount to a violation of Brady or D.C. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 16, with regard to defendant's conviction for sexual abuse of a child, because defendant failed to show how the results would have helped his defense or otherwise changed the result of the trial.
|
|||||
| Rose v. United States, No. 04-CO-434, F-431-99,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 4, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the evidence was clearly in dispute as to whether defendant assaulted a cab driver, defendant was properly denied relief under D.C. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 118 with regard to having the record of his arrest sealed because defendant failed to show by clear and convincing evidence that he was innocent of the charged crimes.
|
|||||
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. |
