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 - October 9 - October 16, 2008
  
Brisbon v. United States, Nos. 02-CF-601, 02-CF-777 & 04-CO-144, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 9, 2008, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Defendant was entitled to a new trial because trial court's error in admitting a codefendant's full confession incriminating defendant in a joint trial was not harmless. Without the confession, the government's evidence against defendant was largely circumstantial.

Search Cases for Free
  
Burton v. NTT Consulting, LLC, No. 07-AA-538, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 9, 2008, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Unemployment benefits case was remanded as administrative law judge abused his discretion by refusing to conduct factual inquiry concerning unemployment benefits claimant's explanation for her absence at hearing and by failing to explain why she could not satisfy grounds for relief under D.C. Mun. Regs. tit. 1, ? 2833.2.

Search Cases for Free
  
Fred A. Smith Mgmt. Co. v. Cerpe, Nos. 07-CV-35, 07-CV-36, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 9, 2008, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Judgment under the District of Columbia Human Rights Act, D.C. Code ? 2-1401.01 et seq., for sexual harassment against a supervisor and retaliation against an employer, its officers, and the supervisor was affirmed because there was sufficient evidence that the supervisor sexually harassed the employee who was subsequently fired for complaining.

Search Cases for Free
  
Wilburn v. District of Columbia, No. 07-CV-287, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 9, 2008, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Employee's complaint, under D.C. Code ?? 1-615.53 and 1-615.54(a), for violation of the District of Columbia Whistleblower Protection Act was dismissed because the employee's statements criticizing the performance of a law firm acting under a contract did not constitute a protected disclosure within the meaning of D.C. Code ? 1-615.52(a)(6).

Search Cases for Free
  
In re Mittendorff, No. 08-BG-1159, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 16, 2008, Filed
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free
  
In re Wing, No. 08-BG-571 & 08-BG-572, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 16, 2008, Filed
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free
  
White v. United States, No. 06-CF-942, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 16, 2008, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: D.C. Code ? 22-3013 conviction was supported by ward's testimony that sexual act occurred with corrections officer. Jury had prerogative to resolve ward's ambiguous testimony in favor of guilt. Sentence did not exceed statutory maximum and reflected ward's vulnerability as transgender inmate in all-male prison unit and non-consensual nature of act.

Search Cases for Free
  
Back to Top
  


Copyright© 2011 LexisNexis®, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.