Case law

Berry v. Kinlein

219 A.2d 850 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 1, 1966

Accord, Corbett v. Kinlein, D.C.App., 191 A.2d 246 (1963). Affirmed. . Code 1961, § 2-421 et seq. . Code 1961, § 2-429. .

Munawar v. Tibbs

981 A.2d 584 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 17, 2009

Brown. The language at the top of the first page of the deed, as provided by the Recorder’s office, indicates that the VA sold the deed to “Mary L. Brown, unmarried.” … BROWN FRANKLIN TIBBS When recorded mail to: MARY L. BROWN FRANKLIN TIBBS 527 16th Street, NE Apt # 1 Washington, DC 20002 Approximately ten years later, in March 1999, Mary L. Brown married Mohammad Munawar.

Anderson, Sr. v. D.C. Dep't of Employment Services

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 12, 2023

Anderson’s claims as untimely, and the Compensation Review Board (CRB) affirmed. Mr. … v.

In Re Shearin

764 A.2d 774 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 28, 2000

Cratty v. United States, 82 U.S.App. D.C. 236, 243, 163 F.2d 844, 851 (1947); George v. United States, 75 U.S.App.D.C. 197, 200 , 125 F.2d 559, 562 (1942); LoSacco v. … George Washington Univ. v. Waas, 648 A.2d 178 , 182 n. 6 (D.C.1994) (citations omitted); see also Bliss v. Bliss, 733 A.2d 954 , 960 n. 13 (D.C.1999).

West End Citizens Ass'n v. D.C. Zoning Commission

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 22, 2024

Wheatley v. D.C. Zoning Comm’n, 229 A.3d 754, 758 (D.C. 2020). This court reverses the Commission’s 3 Pursuant to D.C. Code § 6-641.07, “all meetings of the Board shall be open to the public. … Ass’n v. D.C. Bd. of Zoning Adjustment, 605 A.2d 22, 38 (D.C. 1992) (citing Lamont v. Rogers, 479 A.2d 1274, 1278 (D.C. 1984)); see Price v. D.C.

McRae v. Hyman

667 A.2d 1356 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 7, 1995

See Davis v. Henderson, 652 A.2d 634 (D.C.1995); White v. Hyman, 647 A.2d 1175 (D.C.1994). … See Greenholtz v.

Gerald G. Neill, Jr. v. District of Columbia Public Employee Relations Board and Fraternal Order of Police, Metropolitan Police Department Labor Committee

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 19, 2014

Brown v. District of Columbia Pub. Emp. … the Board such order of enforcement [upon petition by an aggrieved party] as in the case of a request by the Board under subsection (b). . . .”). 20 Reply Brief at 4 (quoting Summers v.

Lindner v. District of Columbia

32 A.2d 540 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 29, 1943

See Security National Bank v. Young, 8 Cir., 55 E.2d 610, 84 A.L.R. 100 , certiorari denied 286 U.S. 551 , 52 S.Ct. 502 , 76 L.Ed. 1287 ; Ward v. Board of County Com’rs of Love County, 253 U.S. 17 , 40 S.Ct. 419 , 04 L. … Tumulty v. District of Columbia, 69 App.D.C. 390, 400 , 102 F.2d 254, 264 . See, also, Powder River Cattle Co. v. Board of Commissioners, C.C., 45 E. 323, cited in Panitz v. District of Columbia, 72 App.

In Re Roundtree

467 A.2d 143 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 19, 1983

E.g., Crane v. Hahlo, 258 U.S. 142 , 42 S.Ct. 214 , 66 L.Ed. 514 (1922); Sill v. Pennsylvania State University, 462 F.2d 463 (3d Cir.1972). … Quaglino, 88 Cal.App.3d 542 , 152 Cal.Rptr. 47 (1979); Kurtenbach v. TeKippe, 260 N.W.2d 53 (Iowa 1977); Crest Investment Trust, Inc. v. Comstock, 23 Md.

KRAMER ASSOCIATES, INC. v. Ikam, Ltd.

888 A.2d 247 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 22, 2005

Comstock & Co. v. … Brown v. Dyer, 489 A.2d 1081, 1083 (D.C.1985). 2. The Evidence The question of whether unjust enrichment occurred is one of law, which we decide de novo. 4934, Inc. v.

Watson v. Kotler

264 A.2d 141 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 13, 1970

See Brown v. Southall Realty Co., D.C.App., 237 A.2d 834 (1968). The trial court granted judgment in favor of appellee. In Brown v. … We note that in Brown v.

Anderson, Sr. v. D.C. Dep't of Employment Services

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 12, 2023

Anderson’s claims as untimely, and the Compensation Review Board (CRB) affirmed. Mr. … v.

Donahue v. Thomas

618 A.2d 601 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 20, 1992

Brown, Inc. v. Moylan, 509 A.2d 98 , 100 n. 4 (D.C.1986) (citing Max Holtzman, Inc. v. … Board of Equalization and Review (“the Board”). The Department officers had ten days to respond to appellant’s request under the applicable statutory and regulatory provisions.

In Re Artis

883 A.2d 85 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 8, 2005

R. 16 & 17); see also Moms v. … See Snyder v. Maryland Cas.

Park v. Brahmbhatt

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 13, 2020

The question is not whether Mr. 40 Mohler v. Houston, 356 A.2d 646, 647 (D.C. 1976). 41 Id. (quoting Brown v. Shimabukuro, 118 F.2d 17, 18 (D.C. Cir. 1941)). … See George Washington Univ. v.

In re The Bright Ideas Co.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 10, 2022

See Wright v. Thomas D. Walsh, Inc., 856 A.2d 1108, 1110 n.6 (D.C. 2004) (refusing to consider proffered evidence of mootness where the parties had never moved to supplement the record with evidence of it); Brown v. … Wall v.

Penny v. United States

694 A.2d 872 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 1, 1997

In Brown v. … See Brown, supra, 627 A.2d at 504 n. 6 (citing cases). We agree with the Second Circuit’s observation in United States v.

Matter of Willcher

447 A.2d 1198 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 2, 1982

Willcher v. United States, D.C.App., 408 A.2d 67 (1979). … Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Walman, 280 Md. 453, 459 , 374 A.2d 354, 358 (1977) (quoting Braverman v.

In re Seth Adam Robbins

192 A.3d 558 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 30, 2018

See, e.g., Sturgis v. District of Columbia Dep’t of Emp’t Servs., 629 A.2d 547, 554 (D.C. 1993). … Carr v. Rose, 701 A.2d 1065, 1075 (D.C. 1997) (quoting Smith v. Jenkins, 562 A.2d 610, 615 (D.C. 1989)). Mr.

Monroe v. United States

389 A.2d 811 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 18, 1978

United States v. Young, 482 F.2d 993 (5th Cir. 1973); Sawicki v. Johnson, 475 F.2d 183 (6th Cir. 1973); United States v. Morrissey, supra; Brown v. Craven, 424 F.2d 1166 (9th Cir. 1970); Brown v. … Brown v. United States, supra; United States v. Young, supra; United States v. Calabro, supra. Its ruling will be disturbed on appeal only if the court has abused its discretion.