 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Artis-Bey v. District of Columbia, No. 03-CV-220,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 13, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in granting summary judgment to District of Columbia on inmate's claim that prison guards assaulted him at District of Columbia jail as the inmate's substantial compliance with the correctional facility's grievance procedure satisfied the exhaustion requirement of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C.S. § 1997e et seq.
|
|||||
| Butler v. United States, No. 00-CF-621, No. 03-CO-1427,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 13, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in denying petitioner's post-conviction petition for a writ of error coram nobis, as petitioner had not alleged existence of any errors of fact that were in need of correction; indeed, petitioner's allegation of error was limited to an error in professional judgment on his attorney's part in failing to move for a mistrial.
|
|||||
| Douglas v. Kriegsfeld Corp., No. 02-CV-711,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 13, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a tenant's appeal from a trial court ruling barring her "reasonable accommodation" defense under the federal Fair Housing Act based on alleged mental impairment, a jury could find that the landlord defaulted on its legal obligation to engage the tenant in a discussion of her request, and improperly refused to grant the requested accommodation.
|
|||||
| Edelhoff v. Shakespeare Theatre at the Folger Library, Inc., No. 04-CV-754,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 13, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of tenant's motion to vacate default judgment was improper in landlord's suit for possession as default judgment was void since service of process was ineffective under D.C. Code Ann. § 16-1502 (2001). Landlord knew that tenant might be out of District of Columbia and did not attempt to contact her at telephone number that she had provided.
|
|||||
| In re Brennan, No. 04-BG-148,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 13, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since attorney had notice and was represented by counsel in Maryland discipline proceeding where she consented to findings she violated Maryland's professional conduct rules by failing to file state and federal income tax returns, imposition of reciprocal identical 90 day suspension was warranted under D.C. Bar R. XI, § 11 and was ordered.
|
|||||
| In re DeWitt, No. 04-BG-306,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 13, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was suspended for 60 days, with stay in favor of 18-month term of probation, in reciprocal disciplinary proceeding as there was no miscarriage of justice in California proceeding since attorney agreed to stipulated facts, admitted violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 6068(c), and consented to sanction imposed by California court.
|
|||||
| In re I.J., No. 03-FS-671,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 13, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Juvenile was "in custody" when questioned by officer, as he was questioned in office where youth center staff sent him, away from public view; officer did not tell him he was free to leave; and, having been confronted with obvious evidence of guilt, he could reasonably have assumed he could not leave. Thus, Miranda warnings had been required.
|
|||||
| McGregor v. Grimes, No. 03-CV-793,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 13, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: If D.C. Code Ann. § 32-1503(a-3) did not apply, workers' compensation claimant, injured in District of Columbia while working for Maryland employer, covered by Maryland workers' compensation insurance, could not recover from fellow employee, even though Maryland law did not bar such suits, as suit was barred under D.C. Code Ann. § 32-1504(b).
|
|||||
| Muhammad v. Vill. Learning Ctr., No. 04-CV-526,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 13, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court abused its discretion in denying the guardian's motion to extend time for service and for other relief, including an order to reinstate the guardian's complaint; trial court should have, but did not, consider the factors under D.C. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 41(b) in deciding whether the guardian's complaint should have been reinstated.
|
|||||
| Nuyen v. Luna, No. 03-CV-1373,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 13, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's failure to provide reasons for denying landlord's motion to vacate default on tenant's counterclaim for rent abatement due to failure to correct housing code violations was an abuse of discretion that warranted reversal; landlord's argument of lack of notice was claim of excusable neglect under D.C. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1).
|
|||||
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. |
