Case law

Ruffin v. Temple Church of God in Christ, Inc.

749 A.2d 719 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 6, 2000

See, e.g., Doe v. Georgetown Center (II), Inc., 708 A.2d 255, 257 (D.C.1998) (instructions read as a whole); King v. … See, e.g., Hausam v.

In Re Fair

780 A.2d 1106 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 13, 2001

The Board agreed with and adopted the Hearing Committee’s findings of fact. The Board’s summary of those factual findings is attached as Appendix A. … requirement was essentially a procedural provision, replacing the former percentage fee compensation with a “procedural framework" to aid the court in determining the "reasonableness" of the fee, citing and quoting Poe v.

Singleton v. District of Columbia Department of Corrections

596 A.2d 56 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 30, 1991

Singleton appealed to the Administrator of the Central Facility, who affirmed the housing board’s decision. … Miller Development Co. v. District of Columbia Zoning Commission, 340 A.2d 420, 422 (D.C.1975) *57 (en banc). The proceeding before the prison housing board in Singleton’s case does not pass this test.

In re Andrew J. Kline

113 A.3d 202 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 9, 2015

In Zanders v. … And subsequently in Miller v.

In re Oscar S. Mayers, Jr.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 21, 2015

PER CURIAM: The Board on Professional Responsibility (the Board) recommends disbarment of Oscar S. … V. For the foregoing reasons, and in consideration of the entire record, we agree with the Board’s recommendation.

Hawkins v. Butler-Truesdale

584 A.2d 1241 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 19, 1990

Board of Elections and Ethics (Board of Elections), and to declare the “true results” of the election. … This case is controlled by Boone v. Taylor, 256 A.2d 411 (D.C.1969), in which this court effectively held that § 31-101(a) does not prohibit partisan campaigning for membership on the Board of Education.

In Re Uscinski

981 A.2d 588 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 1, 2009

United States v. Uscinski, 369 F.3d 1243, 1246 (11th Cir.2004). … The Board’s Recommendation The Board makes two recommendations. 10 First, the Board recommends that respondent be disbarred, as a “substantially different discipline,” for intentional misappropriation of client funds.

In Re Woodard

636 A.2d 969 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 3, 1994

Attorney Grievance Comm. of Maryland v. … Rodney V. Burbaeh, a board certified psychiatrist, Dr. Amazair McAllister, a family practitioner; and Dr. Linda Berg-Cross, a clinical psychologist. Ms.

Jones v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services

451 A.2d 295 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 4, 1982

We held in Jones v. … Hickenbottom v. District of Columbia Unemployment Compensation Board, D.C.App., 273 A.2d 475, 477-78 (1971) (citations omitted).

Stewart v. United States

687 A.2d 576 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 23, 1996

Brown observed the injured man enter a blue vehicle. Brown’s testimony was corroborated by another witness, Mr. Johnson. … See Cooke v. United States, 107 U.S.App. D.C. 223, 224, 275 F.2d 887, 888 (D.C.Cir.1960); Wilson v. United States, 91 U.S.App. D.C. 135, 136, 198 F.2d 299, 300 (D.C.Cir.1952); Townley v.

In Re Lee

755 A.2d 1034 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 13, 2000

PER CURIAM: The Board on Professional Responsibility (“Board”) recommends that Philip L.K. … Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Williams, 66 Ohio St.3d 71 , 609 N.E.2d 149, 150 (1993) (“Williams knowingly conspired to launder what he thought to be profits from illegal drug sales. Such conduct speaks for itself.

In re G.E.

879 A.2d 672 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 21, 2005

Brown v. United States, 590 A.2d 1008, 1020 (D.C.1991). … Brown did not testify at the suppression hearing. Officer Burggraf testified that he had no contact with Mr. Brown subsequent to July 29, 2004. .

In Re Schneider

951 A.2d 798 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 3, 2008

XI, § 11(d). 2 The Board on Professional Responsibility (“Board”) has now recommended that identical reciprocal discipline of disbarment be imposed. … Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Maryland v. Schneider, 399 Md. 679 , 926 A.2d 198 (2007). 2 .

Bredehoft v. Alexander

686 A.2d 586 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 23, 1996

Williams v. Board of Trustees of Mount Jezreel Baptist Church, 589 A.2d 901, 910 (D.C.1991); Kleiman v. Aetna, supra, 581 A.2d at 1266 . A. … Cooter & Gell v. Hartman Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 405 , 110 S.Ct. 2447, 2460-61 , 110 L.Ed.2d 359 (1990); Park v.

In Re Arneja

790 A.2d 552 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 31, 2002

The Board recommends that Arneja be suspended from the practice of law for one year. Bar Counsel contests the Board’s failure to find misappropriation of client funds on two grounds. … On or about October 2, 1995, following his discharge by Gonzalez, Arneja filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia entitled Gonzalez, et al. v.

In re Robert S. Fastov

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 18, 2014

Parklane Hosiery Co. v. … See K.H. v.

Wang v. 1624 U Street, Inc.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 24, 2021

Compare Ortberg v. … She merely responded to a process (the liquor license protest process) in a forum (the Board) that Chi Cha initiated. See Shin v.

In re Green

143 A.3d 778 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 29, 2016

Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Green, 441 Md. 351 , 107 A.3d 1220 (2015) (mem.order); Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Green, 441 Md. 80 , 105 A.3d 500, 510-14 (2014). … We therefore accept the Board’s recommendation that Mr.

Matter of Kerr

424 A.2d 94 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 17, 1980

[Emphasis added.] *98 See, e. g., MacKinnon v. … The Board, in turn, had adopted those conclusions.

Barber v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services

449 A.2d 332 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 5, 1982

Hawkins v. District Unemployment Compensation Board, D.C.App., 390 A.2d 973, 975 (1978), quoting Woodward & Lothrop, Inc. v. … Id. at 83 ; Hawkins v. District Unemployment Compensation Board, supra.