 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Briggs v. Israel Baptist Church, No. 06-CV-325,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 4, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not abuse its discretion by modifying a scheduling order under D.C. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(6) to allow apartment home owners to assert a limitations defense they had preserved. The court also did not err by allowing a church leave to amend its answer under D.C. Super. Ct. R. Civ. P. 15(a) to assert the limitations defense.
|
|||||
| Featherson v. Educ. Diagnostic Inst., Inc., Nos. 05-CV-1061 & 05-CV-1542,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 4, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court abused its discretion by denying a consultant's request to issue a subpoena for documents to a school district because the requested documents were both relevant and probative in the consultant's action to enforce a settlement agreement against an educational corporation as the consultant could not have proved her claim without them.
|
|||||
| Hill v. Medlantic Health Care Group, Nos. 05-CV-776 & 05-CV-806,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 4, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Doctors were granted judgment as a matter of law on a patient's medical malpractice claims because the patient's medical expert, though initially qualified as an expert, failed to provide a basis for his knowledge of the applicable national standard of care, or his opinion that the doctors breached the national standard of care in their treatment.
|
|||||
| Island Dev. Corp. v. District of Columbia, No. 05-CV-1028,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 4, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Grant of summary judgment to the District of Columbia on a developer's claim for breach of a lease was reversed and remanded because neither federal decisions, nor the National Children's Island Act of 1995, Pub. L. No. 104-163, rendered performance of the lease impossible, frustrated its purpose, or caused the lease to terminate by its own terms.
|
|||||
| McIntosh v. United States, No. 00-CM-841,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 4, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's Sixth Amendment right to public trial was violated when trial court closed courtroom during testimony by sexual assault victim, a minor who suffered from social disorders and borderline mental retardation, as defendant's interest in open trial was not considered and finding victim was more vulnerable was insufficient to justify closure.
|
|||||
| McNeil v. United States, No. 04-CF-1233,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 4, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conviction of felony murder while armed, under D.C. Code §§ 22-2101 and 22-4502, was reversed and remanded for a new trial because the presentation of evidence and argument by the prosecution that, shortly after arrest, defendant invoked her Miranda right to silence, violated defendant's rights under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
|
|||||
| Sims v. District of Columbia, No. 05-CV-801,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 4, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of a former employee's grievance against the District of Columbia was affirmed because, although the District violated D.C. Mun. Regs. tit. 6, § 833.2 by offering him an appointment to the Excepted Service without satisfying the necessary waiver of Career Service rights, the denial of the claim was supported by substantial evidence.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
