 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Davidson v. Office of Emple. Appeals, No. 04-CV-913,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 27, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly affirmed an agency's decision to terminate a fire fighter's employment based on insubordination, because the firefighter was not entitled to a de novo hearing at the agency level, and the evidence supported the finding that the fire fighter was insubordinate for refusing to participate in a substance abuse program.
|
|||||
| Garby v. George Wash. Univ. Hosp., No. 03-CV-960,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 27, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In wife's wrongful death and survival action, she claimed that hospital and attending psychiatrist's negligence proximately caused patient's death. But, judgment as a matter of law in their favor was proper as only conjecture supported conclusion that additional efforts to persuade patient to agree to voluntary hospitalization would have succeeded.
|
|||||
| In re Estate of Derricotte, No. 01-PR-1210,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 27, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court affirmed order requiring attorney to return legal fees to the estate that he had originally been granted for his representation of two brothers in what was ultimately an unsuccessful effort to serve at personal representatives of estate. Attorney failed to establish two necessary elements of laches: unexcused delay and prejudice to himself.
|
|||||
| In re Gallagher, No. 02-BG-1375,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 27, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As an attorney's due process rights were not violated by use of a videotaped deposition of his former client during Maryland disciplinary proceeding, since he had opportunity to cross-examine client, District of Columbia imposed reciprocal discipline under D.C. Bar R. XI, ¿ 11(f) and disbarred him for dishonesty and misappropriating client funds.
|
|||||
| In re Mendoza, No. 05-BG-784,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 27, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where attorney submitted vouchers for payment from private party for work on assigned cases that were not submitted to court, attorney violated D.C. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(c); substantial evidence supported board on professional responsibility's findings, so court accepted them under D.C. Bar R. 11, ¿ 9(g)(1), along with sanction of suspension.
|
|||||
| In re Smith, No. 03-BG-998,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 27, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Identical reciprocal discipline of disbarment was ordered since the attorney did not attempt to rebut the presumption favoring identical reciprocal discipline with evidence of any of the exceptions under D.C. Bar R. 11, ¿ 11(c). Disbarment was appropriate for the attorney's misappropriation of client funds and dishonest conduct.
|
|||||
| Parreco v. D.C. Rental Hous. Comm'n, No. 03-AA-1488,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, October 27, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A tenant's failure to argue violation of the notice requirements of D.C. Code Ann. ¿ 42-3502.08(f) precluded an agency from invalidating a rent increase on those grounds, and the absence of findings of genuinely willful violation of the regulations also precluded imposition of a civil fine.
|
|||||
| Wilson-Bey v. United States, No. 01-CF-293, No. 01-CF-633,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, November 2, 2005, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
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. |
