 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Am. Univ. in Dubai v. D.C. Educ. Licensure Comm'n, Nos. 05-AA-458, 05-CV-459, and 05-CV-643n11 This appeal was mooted by our Order dated May 17, 2005. See infra note 12.,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Orders by the Superior Court of the District of Columbia and the District of Columbia Education Licensure Commission revoking a foreign university's educational license were vacated, and the case was remanded for dismissal because the court failed to join the university as an indispensable party under D.C. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 19.
|
|||||
| Blodgett v. Univ. Club, No. 04-CV-810,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment award against a club member who was expelled from a private club was affirmed because the club did not publicly discriminate against the club member in violation of D.C. Code § 2-1402.31 of the District of Columbia Human Rights Act of 1977 by expelling him. Moreover, the expulsion process was fundamentally fair.
|
|||||
| In re Fuller, No. 06-BG-1303,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was admonished in the District of Columbia in a reciprocal disciplinary proceeding because there was no basis for any exception set forth in D.C. Bar R. XI, § 11(c) to apply, and support existed for the finding. While admonishment was outside the choice of sanctions provided by D.C. Bar R. XI, § 3, identical discipline was proper.
|
|||||
| Oliver v. Mustafa, Nos. 06-CV-205, 06-CV-508,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Landlord's failure to file an answer was cause for an entry of default under D.C. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(5) and 55(a), and the alleged facts were rendered admitted as the landlord did not show that the allegations in the complaint were not well-pleaded. The trial court also did not abuse its discretion in awarding the tenant attorneys' fees.
|
|||||
| Torres v. United States, No. 01-CF-755,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, August 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's motion to suppress his custodial statements because substantial evidence showed that he was not impaired as a non-English speaking person, as defined by D.C. Code §§ 2-1901(2) and 2-1901(4). Therefore, he was not entitled to a qualified interpreter's services under D.C. Code § 2-1902(e).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
