 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| In re Steinberg, No. 03-BG-801,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, December 30, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney who failed to reply to a request that he respond to an underlying disciplinary complaint on five occasions was suspended from the practice of law for 30 days, with reinstatement conditioned on proof of fitness to practice law.
|
|||||
| Lopez v. United States, No. 03-CO-88,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, December 30, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial counsel was not constitutionally deficient for failing to call eyewitness and expert to testify; although portion of eyewitness testimony supported self-defense contention, remainder was potentially damaging, and expert lacked credibility.
|
|||||
| Majerle Mgmt. v. D.C. Rental Hous. Comm'n, No. 02-AA-427,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, December 30, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Based on unique facts, tenant was not time-barred from bringing her claim for rent overcharges as management company, within three years of overcharging rent, acknowledged correct rent ceiling and stated that rent charged might have been overcharge.
|
|||||
| White v. United States, No. 02-CF-836,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, December 30, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea was not abuse of discretion under fair and just standard as government made strong proffer, which defendant adopted, and defendant delayed three weeks in notifying trial court of wish to withdraw plea.
|
|||||
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. |
