District of Columbia, September, 2007, 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 - September 27, 2007

Carlson Constr. Co. v. Dupont W. Condo., Inc., No. 06-CV-918, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, September 27, 2007, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Condominium building owner was granted summary judgment because a contractor who was not licensed as a home improvement contractor in the District of Columbia accepted advance payments for work done under a contract. The contract was thus rendered void and unenforceable, and the owner was entitled to reimbursement of progress payments already paid.

Search Cases for Free

Crawford v. United States, No. 01-CF-269, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, September 27, 2007, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Attempt to assert defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel at unrelated hearing had no legal effect on right in this matter. Trial court did not err in failing to sanction prosecutor for improper statements as, inter alia, defense counsel had opportunity to cross-examine witness about talk with prosecutor and curative instructions were given.

Search Cases for Free

In re Bauer, No. 06-BG-1404, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, September 27, 2007, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Attorney was suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia for nine months in a reciprocal disciplinary proceeding under D.C. Bar R. XI, ? 11 because he acknowledged that he breached his fiduciary duties in administering a trust in the State of Illinois, and no exception was filed under D.C. Bar R. XI, ? 9(g)(2) in the proceeding.

Search Cases for Free

Limpuangthip v. United States, No. 05-CM-951, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, September 27, 2007, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Fourth Amendment was not implicated during search of defendant's college dormitory room because special police officers (SPOs) were not acting as agents of the state when the community director conducted a search of defendant's room; evidence showed SPOs' involvement was peripheral, producing a master key and evidence bags for the director to use.

Search Cases for Free

Communities Portal