Case law

In re D.G.

583 A.2d 160 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 3, 1990

After six weeks without contact, the mother re-established ties with her children, and they were returned to her care. … The Fourth and Fifth Circuits held that the CWA gave the children causes of action, and that state officials were not entitled to qualified immunity from the suits.

Mendes v. Johnson

389 A.2d 781 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 13, 1978

The court noted that the common law rule permitting the use of “any force necessary to expel the tenant” had been “qualified to prevent physical violence, force and breach of the peace.” Id. at 819 . … Goodman, supra, the trial court’s finding that appellant’s conduct was conscious, wilful, and in utter disregard of appellee’s rights, was clearly erroneous. IV.

McDonald v. District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustument

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 6, 2023

Further, because under a correct conception of the regulations, the proposed facility clearly qualified for a special exception as an assisted living CCRC based on the Board’s findings, there is no need to remand for consideration … The Board clearly applied public good flexibility based on its determination that the proposed building “promotes a public good in both the continuation of the existing church and the establishment of the CCRC use” (emphasis

Sheriff v. Brown

16 D.C. 172 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 13, 1886

A contrary principle is now fully established, in the doctrine already considered, that the general intent, although first expressed, shall overrule the particular.’ … “It appears in this case most clearly from his own explicit declarations, that it was his great and leading'.object to *178 malee an equal distribution of his property amongst all his children, being governed in this last

Weatherly v. Second Northwest Coop. Homes Assoc., Inc.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 14, 2023

Weatherly] is not a member and did not receive the property via the clearly delineated transfer process,” the magistrate judge “did not err in concluding that [Ms. … “To prevail on a claim for breach of contract, a party must establish (1) a valid contract between the parties; (2) an obligation or duty arising out of the contract; (3) a breach of that duty; and (4) damages caused by

Colbert v. District of Columbia

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 16, 2023

First, the Non-Liability Act waives only one defense, the District’s sovereign immunity. … Colbert might have had to sue the driver is clearly foreclosed by the Non-Liability Act, which, as explained above, immunizes government employees from suit under exactly these circumstances. See D.C. Code § 2-415(a).

Jackson v. District of Columbia Board of Elections & Ethics

999 A.2d 89 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 15, 2010

Charter Amendment No. 2 — Subpart 2 as codified — establishes the right of recall. … The right to discriminate, including the right to discriminate on racial grounds, was now embodied in the State’s basic charter, immune from legislative, executive, or judicial regulation at any level of the state government

Meek v. Shepard

484 A.2d 579 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 30, 1984

Shepard’s evidence, even when viewed in the light most favorable to her, 5 clearly “failed to clear the first hurdle of establishing the standard of care.” Haven v. … Iffy even appeared to render an opinion regarding the standard of care without qualifying it by saying what he himself would do.

Stevens v. American Service Mutual Insurance Co.

234 A.2d 305 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 18, 1967

Appellee has clearly projected its corporate presence into the District in furtherance of its essential business purposes. … It is our opinion that appellant established her right to recover against appellee the unsatisfied portions of the judgments rendered by the District Court.

In re J. M. W.

411 A.2d 345 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 10, 1980

the legal custody of a public or private agency authorized to care for the delinquent child; (3) commit him for medical, psychiatric or other treatment at an appropriate facility; (4) place him with a relative or other qualified … Not only did Judge Murphy acknowledge this fact, but Judge Pratt’s disposition order of June 6 clearly indicates that appellant was committed to the custody of the SRA.

Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority v. L'Enfant Plaza Properties, Inc.

448 A.2d 864 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 8, 1982

On this record, we cannot conclude that the trial court’s interpretation of the evidence *868 is clearly erroneous. See District of Columbia v. … A: I would say in general, yes, whereby I would have to qualify my answer.

Jones v. United States

548 A.2d 35 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 9, 1988

But more succinctly, “courts should not subsume the question of qualifying the [scientific] process ... under the question of qualifying the expert.” People v. Law, 40 Cal.App.3d 69, 75 , 114 Cal.Rptr. 708, 711 (1974). … On the other hand, the test results were clearly probative of whether or not appellant had some prior experience with drugs.

Washington, D.C. Ass'n of Realtors v. District of Columbia

44 A.3d 299 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 24, 2012

l-207.71(c) (providing that, except for § 401(b), Title IV of the Home Rule Act ("The District Charter"), which includes § 450, "shall take effect January 2, 1975, if Title IV is accepted by a majority of the registered qualified … Branstad, 504 N.W.2d 888, 890 (Iowa 1993) (holding that a fund becomes "immune from diversion by a subsequent legislative transfer only when the diversion would conflict with a constitutional provision or impair a contractual

Breen v. District of Columbia

400 A.2d 1058 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 11, 1979

If § 12-309 is inapplicable to certain types of actions, therefore, the limitation must appear clearly enough in the legislative history to overcome the general language of the statute. … We turn to appellant’s claim that he notified the District in writing of “the approximate time, place, cause, and circumstances of the injury” within six months thereof, as required by § 12-309. *1062 The record establishes

District of Columbia v. Brown

739 A.2d 832 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 4, 1999

carefully drafted “new compensation system”, the District could modify the benefits of the Back Pay Act, until such occurs, the District must continue with the compensation system existing as of December 31, 197[9], and clearly … Payne also recognized that when the Congress created the Panama Canal Company as a corporate entity with the right to sue and be sued, it waived sovereign immunity. Id. at 163 .

Alexandria Canal Railroad & Bridge Co. v. District of Columbia

12 D.C. 217 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 21, 1881

It is an established principle that the power of taxation is the highest attribute of sovereignty ; that its existence will always be presumed ; that, wherever an exemption from taxation is claimed, the language surrendering … We are, therefore, clearly of the opinion that there is nothing in the legislation relied on which exonerates the complainants from taxation. Second.

District of Columbia v. King

766 A.2d 38 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 25, 2001

Smith] never consulted with anyone from DPAH prior to testifying that the establishment of [Mr. King’s] competitive level was proper. … Absent a showing that the decision was clearly erroneous or not supported by the entire record, the Initial Decision should stand (See O’Donnell v.

Franco v. National Capital Revitalization Corp.

930 A.2d 160 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 12, 2007

Chambers County Comm’n, 514 U.S. 35, 49-51 , 115 S.Ct. 1203 , 131 L.Ed.2d 60 (1995), we have established stringent criteria for exercising such jurisdiction. … Some of the language in Kelo may suggest a different approach, but nothing in Kelo clearly overrules these local cases. 12 .

Eldridge v. United States

492 A.2d 879 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 24, 1985

To establish the value of the stolen items, Mr. … As such, she was not qualified to testify concerning the value of goods as would a shop owner or manager....

Gant v. The Lynne Experience, LTD

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 31, 2024

In return for securing payment of compensation, “the employer receives tort immunity; in return for giving up the right to sue the employer, the employee receives swift and sure benefits.” USA Waste of Md., Inc. v. … The Superior Court ruled that it was appellant’s burden to establish TLE’s non-compliance with the statute and that she did not meet that burden.