 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Coto v. Citibank FSB, Nos. 05-AA-629 & 05-AA-1031,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, December 14, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The Office of Administrative Hearings erred in dismissing an unemployment benefits claimant's appeal for lack of jurisdiction because she had faxed the notice of appeal without sending a hard copy as required by its rule. The jurisdictional requirements had been met because the notice had been timely received under D.C. Code § 51-111(b).
|
|||||
| Dillon v. D.C. Dep't of Empl. Servs., No. 05-AA-1249,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, December 14, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Presumption of D.C. Code § 32-1521 that sufficient notice of a workers' compensation claim had been given applied to the timeliness requirement. Thus, on remand, an ALJ was to apply the presumption to a claimant's testimony that he had timely notified his supervisor of his claim under D.C. Code § 32-1513 and to decide whether it had been rebutted.
|
|||||
| In re Brown, No. 06-BG-550,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, December 14, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney, who was suspended indefinitely because of a disability based on alcohol and drug addiction, upon his petition for reinstatement was disbarred, but his disbarment was stayed; and he was placed on term of conditional probation because he had substantially rehabilitated from the alcohol addiction that substantially caused his misconduct.
|
|||||
| In re Hook, No. 06-BG-374,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, December 14, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was suspended from the practice of law in the District of Columbia in a reciprocal disciplinary proceeding because of the rebuttable presumption favoring such discipline, D.C. Bar R. XI, § 11(f). Additionally, the suspension began to run from the date the attorney filed an affidavit that complied with D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(g).
|
|||||
| In re Tatelbaum, No. 06-BG-484,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, December 14, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was suspended in a reciprocal discipline proceeding from practicing law as the lack of any exception heightened the court's deference to the District of Columbia Board on Professional Responsibility's report, D.C. Bar R. XI, § 9(g)(2), and a rebuttable presumption favored the imposition of identical discipline, D.C. Bar R. XI, § 11(f).
|
|||||
| Powell v. United States, No. 04-CM-95,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, December 14, 2006, Decided , December 14, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conviction for simple assault was reversed, as evidence proffered by Government was legally insufficient to disprove defense of parental discipline. Among other things, trial court based its ruling on limited facts surrounding initial altercation at front door of defendant's home, which government presented through prism of a flawed legal argument.
|
|||||
| Tyer v. United States, No. 01-CF-1419,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, December 14, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for second-degree murder was affirmed; the admission of prior statements by a government witness met the requirements of D.C. Code § 14-102(b)(2), as they were consistent with the witness's direct testimony and were offered to rebut the defense assertion that the government had exercised improper influence.
|
|||||
| In re Bagby, Intervention No. 217-06,
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, PROBATE DIVISION, December 19, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court-appointed examiner was awarded compensation for fees and expenses as approved by the probate court. However, the compensation was to be paid from the subject's estate, rather than the Guardianship Fund, because the subject could make the payment from her estate as the subject had obtained a reverse mortgage on her home.
|
|||||
| Earl v. United States, No. 04-CF-466,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, December 20, 2006, Argued, December 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Admission of expert testimony on battered woman's syndrome was proper as it aided jury in understanding, inter alia, why victim did not immediately identify assailant. Injuries sustained, two broken ankles and neck injury, did not permit jury reasonably to infer victim experienced "extreme pain" to degree required for aggravated assault conviction.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
