Case law

Lewis v. United States

483 A.2d 1125 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 2, 1984

There, however, the testimony that the state sought to use for impeachment purposes had been obtained in response to a grant of legislative immunity. … We next examine other evidence adduced by the government that tended to establish the same facts admitted by appellant in his statements.

Arthur Young & Co. v. Sutherland

631 A.2d 354 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 26, 1993

A prima facie case of discrimination in the denial of a promotion normally consists of proof (1) that the plaintiff was a member of a protected class, (2) that he or she was qualified for the promotion, (3) that he or she … The instruction clearly states that Sutherland could not establish that she was constructively discharged solely by proving that the denial of her promotion was the result of discrimination.

Gan v. Van Buren Street United Methodist Church

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 13, 2020

The question for the court in Lea was whether one of the deeds, which was unregistered and held by a bona fide purchaser, qualified for confirmation under a Tennessee limitations act “intended to protect and confirm void … persuasively observed, “the entire concept of ‘circumstances’ in the context of tacking is misplaced”:  37 These important purposes were fully met in this case by a deed that clearly

Matter of CWM

407 A.2d 617 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 12, 1979

holding, we are influenced by § 16-2319, which provides that after the factfinding hearing, the Division shall direct that a predispositional study and report to the Division be made by the Director of Social Services or a qualified … In our view, these provisions clearly mandate that a predisposition report contain information relating to the child's mental state at the time of the offense and also at the time of the disposition hearing to enable the

Matter of Lomax

367 A.2d 1272 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 19, 1977

The social worker, though not qualified by the court as an expert in intrafamily dynamics was permitted to describe some of the interaction between ap-pellee and his wife and to state her impressions of their relationship … However, counsel’s references to the prior civil commitment proceeding and to the jury’s verdict in that trial were so clearly without probative value, and so patently designed to sway the jury, that they constituted grounds

In re: Petition of J.O. & P.O.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 12, 2017

Cummings was qualified as an expert in the field of psychiatry.  21 Dr. … In re Ta.L. clearly contemplates this need to consider K.S.’s competency. (. . . continued) statement’s reliability.

Hercules & Co. v. Shama Restaurant Corp.

613 A.2d 916 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 21, 1992

One cannot close his eyes and blindly rely upon the assurances of another absent some fiduciary relationship or emer-gency_ In the case at bar, the evidence ... clearly establishes that both [plaintiffs] read the written … In such a situation, any continued reliance on the purported oral assurances was clearly unreasonable.

Nixon v. United States

728 A.2d 582 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 11, 1999

Accordingly, this error was “clearly capable of producing an unjust result,” and reversal and remand is warranted. Id. at 31 (footnote omitted). … Ibn-Tamas II, supra, 455 A.2d at 893-94 (discerning no “manifest error” in the trial judge's determination, on remand from this court’s 1979 decision in Ibn-Tamas I, that defendant had failed to establish "general acceptance

A.C. v. N.W.

160 A.3d 509 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 1, 2017

New evidence of abuse would also clearly be relevant to the determination. … Lopez was qualified to testify as an expert in clinical mental health, and although he made occasional objections (many of which were sustained), he did not object (or asserted only a general relevance or form objection)

Gary v. United States

499 A.2d 815 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 17, 1985

“Clearly when the Draftsmen sought to confer special powers on the House, independent of the other House, or of the President, they did so in explicit, unambiguous terms.” … Stumes, supra, 104 S.Ct. at 1345 (when decision of the Supreme Court has not been “clearly” or “distinctly” foreshadowed, the reliance interest is a compelling factor against retroactivity).

In Re AC

573 A.2d 1235 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 26, 1990

Counsel for the hospital and for L.M.C. contend, on the other hand, that A.C. was incompetent to make her own medical decisions and that, under the substituted judgment procedure, the evidence clearly established that A.C … Weingold later qualified his opinion as to A.C.'

District of Columbia v. Savoy Construction Co.

515 A.2d 698 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 26, 1986

He concluded that the designer, employed by the District of Columbia, had established the elevations. … Contracting Officers are similarly qualified. 33 D.C.Reg. 1940-45 (1986) (Mayor's Order 86-44).

Allen v. District of Columbia Police & Firefighters' Retirement & Relief Board

528 A.2d 1225 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 16, 1987

The Board further concluded that "[t]he evidence of record clearly shows a progression of mental decline which simply became more acute when [Allen] was denied pay status sick leave. … I agree with the majority opinion that Allen did not establish any "preexisting (and service-related) psychological injury or illness which might have become disabling because of the subsequent events," namely the treatment

Jenkins v. United States

75 A.3d 174 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 12, 2013

(explaining that “the formalities attending the ‘report of blood alcohol analysis’ [were] more than adequate to qualify [the analyst’s] assertions as testimonial”). … In that case, it was “difficult to imagine a statement more clearly testimonial.” Id. at 13.

Christian v. United States

394 A.2d 1 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 28, 1978

He refused to testify despite having been provided with limited use immunity. … It is established in this jurisdiction that § 1651 applies to the local District of Columbia courts. In Morrow v.

Darnell Hawkins & Marvin Verter, Jr. v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 9, 2015

Wright was sufficient to establish obstruction beyond a reasonable doubt. … Verter’s counsel acted as a “second prosecutor” by establishing that Mr.

Allen v. United States

603 A.2d 1219 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 28, 1992

This rationale does not immunize the defendant who asserts a self-defense claim from the consequences of his failure to act in a manner consistent with his testimony at trial. Cf. Grunewald v. … Upon considering the factors underlying the consciousness of guilt inference, most of the cross-examination was clearly proper.

Medrano-Quiroz v. United States

705 A.2d 642 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 30, 1997

It is unlikely that "those best qualified to serve as jurors will not have formed some impression or opinion [on these controversial subjects]." Irvin, supra, 366 U.S. at 722-23 , 81 S.Ct. at 1642 . … eleven person jury. [18] This case does not involve tampering with a juror from an external source, unauthorized juror investigation, demonstrable false statements by a juror during jury selection, or some other form of clearly

Crocker & Walker v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 1, 2021

An exercise of judicial discretion will not be reversed unless it appears that it was exercised on grounds, or for reasons, clearly untenable or to an extent clearly unreasonable.” … 35 that the judge addressed here was relevancy. 48 As the judge explained, the relevant question bearing on whether A.B. had a motive to curry favor with the prosecution — and the question A.B. was qualified

Davis v. District of Columbia

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 16, 2021

Reorganization Act of 1970 shall serve for a term of fifteen years, and upon completion of such term, such judge shall continue to serve until the judge’s successor is appointed and qualifies.”). … Omotoso said the cost method “over time . . . will clearly not reflect market values of properties driven largely by income generating potentials.” This, like Ms.