 |
|
 |
|
|
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 Wright, No. 04-BG-339,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 20, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court accepted the determination of the D.C. Board on Professional Responsibility and ordered the attorney to be suspended from the practice of law for one year. The Board properly considered the attorney's misconduct in the aggregate when it recommended a sanction, pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XI, ¿ 9(g)(1).
|
|||||
| Medrano v. Osterman, No. 04-CV-890,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 20, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since the property seller had to negotiate in good faith for the full 90 days with each tenant who had expressed a timely written interest in buying, as set out in the Rental Housing Conversion and Sale Act, D.C. Code Ann. ¿ 42-3404.10, and the seller did not do so, the trial court's finding of a valid contract was vacated.
|
|||||
| Sepulveda-Hambor v. District of Columbia, No. 04-CT-103,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 20, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court affirmed judgment denying defendant's motion to seal her arrest records after she was acquitted of failing to obey an order of police officer. Judge did not abuse discretion in declining to hold evidentiary hearing; he stated that he had a clear recollection of trial. There was no circumstance that would make it manifestly unjust not to seal.
|
|||||
| Sitcov v. D.C. Bar, No. 05-BG-258,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 20, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an attorney was administratively suspended for failing to pay bar dues for three years, the District of Columbia Bar was not required to comply with the procedures in D.C. Bar. R. XI, ¿ 6(a)(2) and D.C. Bar. R. XI, ¿ 19(e) because such a suspension was not disciplinary in nature.
|
|||||
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. |
