 |
|
 |
|
|
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 Holdmann, No. 00-BG-1214,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, November 6, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an attorney waived any objection to the recommendation of the Board on Professional Responsibility by failing to present any challenge to the Board, the appeals court followed that recommendation and publicly censured him.
|
|||||
| Morrison v. District of Columbia, No. 98-AA-1597,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, November 6, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Substantial evidence supported workers' compensation agency's finding that injured nurse turned down offer of a job she could have performed, but failure to address argument regarding other reasons for rejecting offer required remand.
|
|||||
| So v. 514 10th St. Assocs., L.P., No. 01-CV-1301,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, November 6, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Commercial tenants failed to show that cashing of check by landlord indicated accord and satisfaction in rent nonpayment case; evidence indicated tenants had notice of default and it was not improper to deny untimely motion to subpoena evidence.
|
|||||
| Vest v. United States, No. 00-CF-205,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, November 6, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a magistrate judge had authority to set pre-release conditions, a superior court judge had authority to find defendant in contempt for disobedience of the magistrate's order.
|
|||||
| Washington v. United States, No. 02-CO-31,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, November 6, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An inmate was procedurally barred from asserting post-conviction claim of ineffective assistance, as he was aware of the basis for this claim before he even noted his direct appeal, let alone before he filed his first motion to vacate sentence.
|
|||||
| Bolden v. United States, Nos. 97-CM-1589, 97-CM-1708,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, November 13, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was insufficient to convict an occupant of an apartment as an aider and abettor of drug possession because, as he was not named on the lease, his authority to admit or eject other guests was inferior to that of the lessee.
|
|||||
| Potomac Elec. Power Co. v. D.C. Dep't of Empl. Servs., No. 02-AA-1325,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, November 13, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a workers' compensation proceeding, a 32 percent PPD rating assigned by an agency director, in contravention of a five percent rating assigned by an ALJ, was reversed because it was based on a medical opinion that the ALJ had explicitly rejected.
|
|||||
| Rodrigues-Novo v. Recchi Am., Inc., No. 02-CV-919,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, November 13, 2003, Order Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District of Columbia court certified to Maryland's highest court the question of whether a multi-state transit authority was a statutory employer protected by workers' compensation exclusivity from injured worker's tort action.
|
|||||
| In re P.B., Docket No.: N-33-00, Social File: 213328, Docket No.: N-936-00, Social File: 215050,
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, FAMILY COURT, November 14, 2003, Permanency Hearing
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a neglect disposition where the mother and father supported the paternal aunt's request for physical placement of the children with her, due process under the Fourteenth Amendment required a finding of clear and convincing evidence that the placement served the child's best interest.
|
|||||
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. |
